aes 
oleae 


rial 
etic 
: 


= - = 
¥ croriet ead pe ren z = 
are 25) wt se a ’ J ‘ 
A ¥ ached Seth: Pah eda basi! 3) 


Aes 
Abita 
SH iritees 
Sat ys 


aa 


PAL otto) 


Hen 
coeaaes 


Sires 


esr ocserer rat 


35 *} 


ees 
Patra 


Ur 
ya 


= of 
yas pak opens te ont 

gee eetalan reels 
ae sens su elterii gia 


<Sy e 
+ iden eee haa fae y 
= ; 


aye 


Le 


ett 


pariah: 
peaeEeicS 
aE rer See 


54 
ss 
Pug Caer 

apersiiies i reat sceceshtr ers 
gab ied beppe n Wop a pe mR aTR Tey tte 
—— 2 W} Fa Pia eed 4 
eke eer aee eres 

: See Tie 4 


top ey 
Sricre cae nrate ct rettare ey 


“=! 
5 Fir as wee 
oa tol Penh det make h Ave ee 4s 1H 1 rh 
ab ey eat on k yece phn raal 
3 . ots ee wis om Et SSEPS St 
See say 


oH pivanerhes were 
oeinee athe 


ms 
Sis atevet 


te St Cn enema A 
Hot pom my pitta tern ee! 


oe hs a 
pbeeiceoticrars weet te rs asses 
we 


Sap maga raed 
: Sate : 
rs anaes tes Seen ue : 
Seer 3 _ rI23 ete be dae Net tee ae ’ 5 - 
Ree ee aa ae RRC hpi fe Ok sma safety ber ecgstier efite bat ; 13 
preset roman Tan i pet rat kate iboptrs tee ale ee CELL oF 
Fyesntentvests esta a Sees at wa ent ee pees las 


bal 
Malthe ait al Ata 
3 


ate er 


5 


oe Ta 
ale iene 
Sate eae 
Li peeres t soe Tee 
Seite oe 
Sere Lt eiiben et iby prewar) 
: 3; Sppasyst tegen esas 
- Se inomt sieves? ree Sek oS 5 ae Sopeb tiace etna eae 
— lmphe & epten ee: Opt bem nd Pain ws! 
me ot See Es, Ewes oh 


elope oasietss ibtarritincintethioleapeh tala 

asim} uaierese abet ee 
edie BETS te detearrareier ater 

Siete pehaten ts erent rns Sietietrert oats spyst saat be BR dirthies Cota 


Pat leg tawgoly grins 
ast nued Peas S “5 


See oi 
Kittay 


“| 
ae or 


eae 
ay Z 


vy 


bay 
ae 
pessteres 


vere 
aoe 


rere 
asics sath. 
grain 
i SEAS oy 


els 
meltg a 
Se ar 


Lp tana! 


ae b : 
eee eat 2 
Sete tye rut hds-aigh 
+ 


petieede 
bt oe 


sata 
ae 
es’ sel 

nan 


i 


ep 


7 
Price 


Mires 


tern iyaig4 
aoe 


eet onl ORY. 
Oo CULPTURE 


HARPER’S FINE ARTS SERIES 
Edited by 
GEORGE HENRY CHASE, Ph.D. 


JOHN E. HUDSON PROFESSOR OF ARCHMOLOGY, HARVARD UNIVERSITY 


A new series embodying the latest results of archeology and critical 
study of the Fine Arts in themselves and in their relation to the evolution 
of civilization. These books are prepared with reference to class use in 
the higher institutions of learning, and they also provide authoritative, 
comprehensive, and interesting histories for the general reader. Each 
volume will contain an unusual number of carefully selected illustrations. 


A HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE 
By Fiske KiMpBauL, M. Arch., Ph.D. 
Assistant Professor of Architecture, University of Michigan 
and 
GEORGE HaroLp EDGELL, Ph.D. 
Assistant Professor of Fine Arts, Harvard University 


A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 
By Pror. GEORGE HENRY CHASE 
and 
Pror. CHANDLER RATHFON Post 
Harvard University 


In Preparation 
A HISTORY OF PAINTING 


By Pror. ArtHUR POPE 
Harvard University 


HARPER & BROTHERS, NEW YORK 
[Established 1817] 


Penson RS) bat N B “AsR TS S'E-RIPE'S 


A HISTORY OF 
PoWLPTURE 


BY 
GEORGE HENRY CHASE, PH.D. 


JOHN E. HUDSON PROFESSOR OF ARCHMOLOGY, HARVARD UNIVERSITY 


AND 


CHANDLER RATHFON POST, PH.D. 


PROFESSOR OF GREEK AND OF FINE ARTS, HARVARD UNIVERSITY 


ILLUSTRATED 


HARPER & BROTHERS PUBLISHERS 
NEW YORK AND LONDON 


A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Copyright, 1925 
By Harper & Brothers 
Printed in the U. S. A. 


A-A 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER PAGE 
PAR Gn MEG e soos ey DR ee ee OAS 

PIN PO Pm eS ig 8) eo) a we 5 wip or lol oe 1 

Pe CamETUAINMCELPTURE ..  6) ck eH ko ers os Ge 15 
PPieevViPsOPOUAMIAN DCULPTURE =. 5°50. 4°... spe 84 
LV] Gaesx Scoveturs: Tue ArcHaic Periop. . . . .-°. 52 
VY, Greek Scutprure: THe Fiera Century .. .. . §8i 
VI. Greex Scutprure: Tue FourrH Century ... . . 112 
-VIl. Greek ScuLPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER . . .. . . . 128 
ePeeiGMGAN “OCULPRURE:? 5° 20 eh. tate feo ope ef. I61 
IX. THe ScuLPTrure oF THE First MILLENNIUM, A.D... . 169 
Deemer eeIVeIDDLM AGES. 6 eee k ee a ee 190 
REINIMIVONAISOANCE 40 G0 ce Se le awe cee oe ew 29D 
Sale bie eAnOoun AND THN. Rococo . ... . . . . +» \ ol 
RUMI OTASSICIGM = = 6 4 wl wt tk te SAAB 
Dive VODERN SCULPTURE: 56 0..0 6) 4) a) soso ee is Be 488 
PVeeelin SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT... . . « s« «, «© 528 
eS eo ss ea ls) bb ee ee 

PRIDE MORESO ULPTORS.. «. 9. <. i oto i is Ga ee ee 


Inpex of MoNUMENTS AND PLAceS . . .». . « » « +004 


ILLUSTRATIONS 


On page 557 will be found an INDEx to Monu- 
MENTS AND Puaces. Those marked by an as- 


terisk (*) indicate an illustration in the text. 


PREFACE 


In accordance with the principles adopted for Harper’s Fine 
Arts Series, the writers of this brief history have tried to 
present a concise account of the development of the art of 
sculpture from the earliest times to the present day, with 
reference especially to recent discoveries and discussions. 
The first chapter was written in collaboration, Chapters II 
to VIII by Mr. Chase, and Chapters [IX to XV by Mr. Post, 
but both have read and revised the whole book. Mr. Post’s 
chapters are, in the main, an abridgment, with the neces- 
sary alterations, of his larger work, “A History of European 
and American Sculpture’; but many sections, such as those 
upon Early Christian art, upon the Spanish Romanesque, and 
upon the early Belgian and the German baroque, have been 
rewritten in accordance with the most recent criticism or with 
changes in his own point of view, and in a large number of 
other cases, for the same reasons, single statements have 
been modified. Some new material, also, has been added, 
especially for modern sculpture, and an attempt has been 
made to achieve a somewhat clearer and more logical arrange- 
ment. Mr. Chase’s treatment of Greek and Roman sculpture 
in Chapters IV to VIII, on the other hand, is, in general, 
an expansion of the briefer sketch contained in his “Greek 
and Roman Sculpture in American Collections.” 

To the many owners of copyright who have granted per- 
- mission to use photographs or other material, the authors wish 
to express their appreciation and thanks. They are especially 
indebted to the Directors of the Fogg Art Museum of 
Harvard University for many courtesies and constant help. 


Crein AG, 
Cra ae les 


cX 
le 


$ 
5 
pt, 
if 


J Hak iliey IP CORON 
Sites CU e TU RE 


A HISTORY 
OF SCULPTURE 


GHAR TER I 
INTRODUCTION 


The paleolithic period. The history of sculpture, if the 
phrase is interpreted in its widest meaning, begins at a very 
early date. Even the men of the earlier age of stone, the 
so-called paleolithic period, carved small figures out of stone 
and bone and decorated the horn and bone handles of their 
weapons and implements with figures of men and animals, 
sometimes carved in relief, sometimes merely scratched with 
incised lines. On the walls of the caves in which they found 
refuge during the long winters of the quarternary period, they 
engraved and painted remarkably lifelike representations of 
the animals with which they were familiar, such as the 
mammoth, the reindeer, and the bison. The most striking 
figures of this sort have been found in caves in and near the 
Pyrenees, in southern France and northern Spain; and in one 
of them, quite recently, a group of two bisons modelled in 
clay was discovered. In all these works of paleolithic man, 
the outstanding quality is the intense realism with which the 
figures are treated. There are many productions of inferior 
craftsmen, but the best of the sculptures display a skill in 
catching characteristic forms and movements which shows 
that the makers deserve to be called artists, no less than the 
professional sculptors of later days. But these memorials of 
primitive man, interesting as they are, can only be briefly 
mentioned here. The race that produced them appears to 
have been almost, if not entirely, overwhelmed by the geologi- 

1s 


2 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


cal changes that mark the end of the quaternary period 
(about 8,000 to 10,000 B.C., according to the latest dates 
suggested by geologists), and there is no evidence that any of 
the knowledge which they had gained was transmitted to 
those who came after them. Their high attainments in the 
field of art remain a curious and isolated phenomenon in the 
history of human progress. 

The neolithic period. Continwty of artistic development. 
One of the most noteworthy features of the succeeding, neo- 
lithic stage of culture is the almost complete absence of works 
of sculpture. The men of this age attained remarkable skill 
in chipping and polishing stone implements and in ornament- 
ing them with patterns. But their rare attempts at repre- 
senting men and animals in stone or clay are of the crudest 
sort, and only serve to emphasize their inferiority in this 
respect to their predecessors. Not until the knowledge of 
copper and bronze made possible the employment of better 
cutting instruments do we find an improvement in the sculp- 
tor’s art. From that time on, a steady progress can be traced, 
and the art was never again wholly lost. It had its great 
periods and its periods of depression, when artists seem to 
have lost almost all that had been gained; but after the 
beginning of the bronze age the tradition was never com- 
pletely broken, and in Europe, at least, from the time when 
the Greeks first essayed sculpture to the present day, the 
style of one period grew out of that of another in a continuous 
and uninterrupted evolution. To trace these developments 
and to show the relations between the products of different 
countries and different civilizations is the purpose of the 
present book. 

Materials of sculpture. Before we undertake this task 
it will be helpful to define somewhat more clearly the mean- 
ing of the term sculpture and to discuss the materials 
with which the sculptor works, his methods and processes, 
and the different kinds of sculpture that he produces. When 
one speaks of sculpture, the image that most naturally occurs 
to the mind is.a statue or group in marble or bronze or a 
relief in one or the other of these materials. But it should 
be emphasized at the outset that these are by no means the 


INTRODUCTION 3 


only materials in which sculpture can be conceived and 
executed. Many kinds of stone besides marble are not 
infrequently employed, both softer stones, such as limestone 
and sandstone, and harder varieties, such as granite, basalt, 
diorite, serpentine, and porphyry. With the exception of 
Italy, the countless monuments of the Romanesque and 
Gothic periods were regularly carved in the common stone of 
the region in which each chanced to be situated. Not only 
bronze, but iron, copper, lead, and other metals are some- 
times used, and statuettes, at least, of gold and silver are 
not uncommon. Wood has been popular as a medium at 
many epochs, especially during the late Gothic period. Ivory 
has been called into service particularly for the minor arts, 
and in Byzantine and Carolingian sculpture the small ivories 
constitute the chief surviving objects for study. The greatest 
works of the ancient Greek sculptors were often built up of 
gold and ivory attached to a frame of wood and metal, with 
precious stones for the eyes and for other details. Stucco, 
a plaster consisting of lime, sand, and finely-crushed marble, 
was occasionally applied by the Romans to the sculptural 
adornment of architecture, and has been utilized sporadically 
ever since. With the rest of the Roman heritage, it was 
cultivated especially in the Renaissance and attained the 
height of its vogue everywhere in the baroque of the seven- 
teenth century. Terracotta has at almost all times been a 
favorite material, because of the facility with which it can 
be handled and with which changes can be made in the 
finished work. By the Greeks it was usually decorated with 
paint, but by others its original reddish-brown surface has 
not seldom been kept intact; during the fifteenth century, 
at Florence, the Della Robbia family evolved a delightful 
method of glazing it over with shining enamel of different 
colors. Here and there more exotic materials have been 
forced to do duty. Wax is frequently used for the first sketch, 
but it has sometimes, for one reason or another, been retained 
even for the completed product; lacquer has naturally 
appealed to the Japanese. The modern struggle for novelty 
has now and then suggested even stranger materials, and 
the Futurists have brought this tendency to its culmination 


4 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


by employing for their sculptural compositions the actual 
substances and objects that they desire to represent. 

The tools. Where the materials are so various, it is obvious 
that methods of work must vary correspondingly. Workers 
in different materials naturally employ different tools, and 
the same sculptor will change his tools and his methods ac- 
cording to the material with which he is dealing. Of all plastic 
substances, clay is the most easily worked. A statue or a relief 
of terracotta is simply moulded by the hands of the maker, 
perhaps with the aid of a modelling stick or a spatula, 
colored and glazed (if color and glaze are used), and fired. 
The sculptor in wood must have utilized at all times the 
familiar instruments of the trade, saws and hammers, 
chisels and gouges of various sorts. For marble and other 
stones, except in so far as machinery has been introduced 
in modern times, the tools of today are largely the same as 
those which were employed in antiquity—pointed hammers 
and drills, curved chisels, claw chisels, and files for rubbing 
down and finishing. The softer classes of stone can often 
be cut with saws or knife-like instruments, and ancient 
statues sometimes show the use of tools of this kind. 

The modern process of making a marble statue or relvef. 
In connection with the technique of working in marble and 
similar materials, there are a number of interesting details 
which have been much discussed.t. The general practice for 
marble statues and reliefs, since at least the beginning of 
the sixteenth century, has been, with some exceptions, the fol- 
lowing. Having first made a small sketch in clay or wax, the 
sculptor then builds up a full-sized model in clay. From this 
a cast is commonly taken in plaster or some other durable 
material. On the cast a number of points, or puntelli, are 
marked. These are next transferred mechanically to a block 
of marble, and holes are drilled into the block to the depth 
required to arrive at corresponding points on what is ulti- 
mately to be the statue or relief. Then the marble is cut 
away until the inner puntelli are reached, and the work is 


*The succeeding paragraphs on processes and polychromy apply to 
western art; no attempt has been made in this book to discuss the 
technical methods of oriental sculpture. 


INTRODUCTION 5 


complete except for the finishing touches. All the transfer- 
ence from the model to the stone is commonly left to as- 
sistants, and even the finishing touches are sometimes en- 
trusted to their hands. For the transference, the assistants 
ordinarily resort to the mechanical device known as the 
pointing-machine. Thus the artist often has no direct and 
personal contact with the marble that bears his signature, 
and at best the work of his hands is confined to adding the 
finishing touches. Such a method is certainly open to grave 
objections, and many critics see in it one reason for the 
mechanical character and lack of warmth and of vitality in 
so much modern sculpture. 

Processes in earlier periods. It is frequently pointed out 
that the sculptors of antiquity and the Middle Ages did not 
work in this way, but attacked the stone directly and carved 
their figures in a “fine frenzy” of inspiration. This statement, 
however, cannot be taken too literally, at least for the ancient 
period. In Greek sculpture there is little evidence for the 
use of puntella until a comparatively late period, and even 
then the small number employed suggests that they served 
rather as general guides for the sculptor than as a means of 
producing a mechanically exact copy. But all this does 
not prove that some sort of model was not frequently em- 
ployed, even in the great period of Greek art, and indeed for 
elaborate decorative compositions it would seem that a series 
of models would be necessary if the artist was to gain a 
clear idea of the total effect of his groups. Probably these 
models would be only small sketches; but on the whole it 
must be said that the evidence in regard to the methods of 
ancient sculptors is inconclusive. In any case, even if in 
some instances the full-sized model intervened, the transfer 
to marble was made by the master himself or at least by 
an assistant who truly deserved the name of artist. The 
medieval sculptor worked directly on the stone from a draw- 
ing or at most a small model. If the commission included a 
large group of sculptures on a church or a monument, the 
master would not have time to do all the execution himself; 
and his collaborators used his drawings as starting-points, 
revealing an zsthetic sense as keen as that of their Greek 


6 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


predecessors. Donatello and at least a large number of other 
Italians in the first century of the Renaissance continued the 
Gothic practice of hewing the stone without constructing a 
full-sized model. The modern intervention of the large model 
began to become general in the next century, the sixteenth; 
but Michael Angelo constituted a brilliant exception to this 
custom of his day. The principal objection to the modern 
practice is that so much of the task is entrusted to helpers who 
are uninspired. If the sculptor himself undertakes the final 
work on his marble statue, beginning at a point where the 
statue is still so incomplete that slight modifications are 
feasible, it is possible that he can make his figure express his 
personality almost as successfully as by any other method. 
The creation of a masterpiece depends primarily on the qual- 
ities of the artist, not on the methods he employs. The artist 
of slight ability may be dominated by a method; the great 
artist is a master by force of genius, and methods with him 
are but means to ends. 

Polychromy. Another question that has been much mooted 
in recent years is the propriety of coloring statues and reliefs. 
It is now generally admitted that, broadly speaking, until 
the beginning of the sixteenth century after Christ, poly- 
chromy was usually applied to sculpture. Among the Greeks 
the art of polychromy was so fully developed that uncolored 
works were quite exceptional. Even during the Hellenistic 
period and under the Roman empire, the application of color 
was not uncommon. Ancient statues in hard stone, to be sure, 
which can be highly polished, were frequently uncolored, 
but in the case of other sorts of stone and of other materials 
it seems to be proved that at least partial polychromy en- 
livened the surfaces. The practice continued until the end 
of the Middle Ages, but began to be abandoned in the Renais- 
sance, partly because the ancient works which were ex- 
cavated and which the sculptors of that period imitated had 
lost their polychromy. Since the beginning of the sixteenth 
century colored sculpture in stone has been a rare phe- 
nomenon, and we have become so accustomed to the associa- 
tion of white or gray with works of sculpture that polychromy 
seems to many little less than barbaric. Those who admire 


INTRODUCTION 7 


polychromy in certain kinds of sculpture, such as wood- 
carvings or the terracottas of the Della Robbia, still find 
themselves unable to admit its beauty in marble or other 
stone. The difficulty lies partly in the fact that the false 
and tawdry modern attempts, in restorations or original 
work, to reproduce ancient and medieval polychromy and 
the faded and dirty tones into which the few remnants of 
old color on medieval statuary have now degenerated are 
calculated to give to the uninitiated a derogatory conception 
of the practice in general. The taste and skill with which 
color was employed on statuary in antiquity, in the Middle 
Ages, and here and there in other periods must be reserved 
for later discussion; but it should be stressed at once that 
ordinarily the pigment was applied in so thin a layer that the 
texture of the surface of the stone or even of the wood was 
preserved and thus the sculptural quality was not sacrificed. 
The ancient bronzes were frequently and the medieval 
bronzes regularly gilded, but there was often also an elabo- 
rate ornamentation by the inlay of other metals and enamels. 
The vacillations of modern art have resulted, sporadically 
but never very successfully, in rather artificial efforts to 
resuscitate polychromy, even when the sculpture is not in- 
tended for a modern imitation of a medieval church. 
Ancient methods for bronze. The methods by which bronze 
statues were made in antiquity can be determined to some 
extent by a study of extant examples, but many details of 
the processes are obscure. Small statuettes have at all times 
been cast solid in moulds of stone or sand or some other 
material. But statues of larger size cannot be cast solid be- 
cause of the great amount of metal required and the danger 
of cracking as the metal cools. The great weight of large 
statues of solid bronze is a further objection. There are pre- 
served a number of primitive statues which were built up with 
plates of beaten bronze or copper soldered or riveted together 
or fastened to a framework. But this method never produces 
very satisfactory results. Very early, therefore, in the his- 
tory of sculpture, the method of hollow casting was developed. 
Two Greek sculptors of Samos, Rhoecus and Theodorus, who 
lived in the sixth century B.C., are said to have invented 


8 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


hollow casting, but the tradition probably means no more 
than that they introduced into Greece an art which had long 
been practised in Egypt, for there are many hollow Egyptian 
statues of bronze which considerably antedate the time of 
these two masters.. The exact methods of the Egyptian work- 
men are unknown, but they probably resembled the method 
which is called the cire perdue process and which continued 
in general favor until about the middle of the eighteenth 
century after Christ. 

The “cire perdue” process. To produce a statue by this 
method the artist first makes a full-sized clay model. From 
this model is constructed a piece-mould of plaster; at the 
present day, when the cire perdue process is used, the mould 
is usually of gelatine, except in the case of larger bronzes. 
The mould is then carefully lined with a layer of wax, which 
thus takes the exact form of the intended statue and is given 
the thickness (ordinarily from % to 5g of an inch) desired 
in the finished bronze; and the whole centre of the wax-lined 
mould is filled with a core of fire-proof material. The piece- 
mould is now removed (not to be used again, unless it is 
necessary to start from the beginning for a new casting), and 
the last refinements of modelling are bestowed upon the wax 
surface. Another solid (not piece) mould is now built around 
the core with the attached wax, and small bronze rods are 
driven through this mould into the core in order that during 
the casting they may be kept in their relative positions 
to each other. Tubes are inserted in the mould at intervals 
to carry the molten metal. The whole is next heated over a 
fire, the wax melts and runs out, and molten bronze is let 
into the narrow space between the mould and the core. Lastly 
the mould is broken off, the core raked out, the bronze rods 
filed off the cast, and the statue is ready for polishing and 
finishing. The wax-covered image is sometimes obtained in 
other ways. After the piece-mould:is complete, a plaster 
cast may be taken from it and pared down until a space is 
left equivalent to that required for the bronze. Or, no piece- 
mould at all is constructed: the core is first built up until 
it has roughly the shape of the completed statue; and it is 
then covered with a layer of wax in which the surface 


INTRODUCTION 9 


modelling is carefully executed. In both of these methods, 
the process of casting, after the wax model is obtained, is 
the same as in the first instance. The disadvantage of the 
last method is that no piece-mould is made and preserved 
as a starting point for subsequent castings, in case the first 
trial fails; but, nevertheless, such evidence as there is suggests 
that it was this method which was employed by the ancients. 
Modern methods for bronze. The revival of an interest 
in processes and in technical perfection, which began towards 
the end of the nineteenth century, has brought with it a 
partial resuscitation of the fine old method of cire perdue; 
but for the century and a half previous to that date, save 
occasionally for large figures, its position had been usurped 
by the process of a sand mould, or sometimes, in the last fifty 
years, by the galvanic method of electrotype deposit. The 
sand process corresponds to the second kind of cire perdue 
method. A mould in sections and a core are made from 
moist sand, a layer of the core, as thick as the desired bronze, 
is removed, and the molten metal introduced between the core 
and mould. For the electrotype method, a mould of gutta- 
percha, of some other material, or even of very hard plaster 
is coated with plumbago or black lead. It is then placed in 
a bath, where the metal is electrolytically deposited into it 
to the requisite thickness; and eventually the mould is broken 
away. After the casting, if the bronze is not to be gilded, it 
is either left with its native tone or given a patina of some 
shade of brown, green, or gray through staining with acid. 
Bronze reliefs. In antiquity reliefs of bronze were pro- 
duced by beating out plates of the metal on wooden or stone 
cores or by beating up the bronze from behind and incising 
details with a sharp tool. Since at least as early as the ninth 
century after Christ, bronze reliefs have usually been cast 
after the same fashion as statues; and inasmuch as.in the 
first century of the Renaissance the norm for reliefs in all 
materials was set by the common bronze examples, a 
highly pictorial treatment of relief with a deep perspective 
of landscape was evolved and has never since lost its vogue 
except in cases where the admiration for ancient art has been 
very potent, as in the neoclassic epoch. Because the starting- 


10 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


point for the clay model from which the casting was 
done was the background, from which, by adding piece upon 
piece, the relief was gradually built up, a deep perspective 
was the natural result. In antiquity the process of beating 
out bronze reliefs rendered it difficult to give to the foremost 
figures the height of projection that was essential if there 
were to be a large number of other planes behind; and in 
any case it was not the bronze but the stone reliefs that set 
the standard. In these, the ancients naturally did not wish 
to remove any more material than was necessary and worked 
from without inward, so that they did not tend to evolve a 
deep background. Reliefs of clay they stamped from moulds, 
and these moulds they could not recess to any great degree 
if they wanted them to be effective in stamping. 

Classifications. Various terms are employed to designate 
different kinds of sculpture. Free-standing figures are often 
referred to as “sculpture in the round,” to distinguish them 
from “sculpture in relief,” in which the figures ‘are not com- 
pletely worked out in three dimensions but are attached to a 
background. High relief (or alto rilievo, haut relief) is re- 
hef in which the forms project decidedly from the back- 
ground and approach, in appearance, figures in the round. 
Low relief (or basso rilievo, bas relief) is relief in which the 
forms emerge but little from the background. Donatello 
evolved a very low sort of relief, the depressed and shadowy 
outlines of which often vanish into the background. Called 
by the Italians rilievo schiacciato (or stiacciato), “squashed 
relief,” it was much cultivated in the fifteenth century and 
has sometimes been imitated in later times, particularly by 
those sculptors who in the nineteenth century once more 
turned with enthusiasm to reproducing the style of the 
Renaissance. Relief that is neither exactly high nor low is 
occasionally called middle relief (mezzo rilievo). 

On the ground of the purpose for which sculpture is 
planned, other convenient distinctions may be made. The 
term decorative sculpture is often applied to works that are 
planned in relation to a larger whole; most relief sculpture 
falls into this class, as well as figures in the round that are 
to be placed on buildings or set up in public places as parts of 


INTRODUCTION 11 


a general scheme. In such works the relation to the whole 
composition exercises a marked influence on the sculptor’s 
conception and execution. Statues or groups that are not 
planned with regard to a larger whole are often called free 
or substantive sculpture, and here the master’s imagination is 
conditioned to a lesser degree, except in so far as he has to 
take into account the setting for his work. It often happens 
that the number of examples of free sculpture that have sur- 
vived from a given period of antiquity is small or that these 
are badly preserved; but since in the great periods, at least, 
decorative sculpture followed closely the progress of free 
sculpture and was executed by distinguished artists, it may 
safely be used by the critic as a basis for his judgment. From 
the beginning of Christian art to the end of the Middle Ages, 
sculpture was chiefly employed to decorate churches, ec- 
clesiastical furniture, civil and domestic buildings, and tombs. 
There were always, however, a certain number of free-stand- 
ing statues of sacred personages, especially of the Virgin, and 
occasion was found also for a few separate portraits; in the 
last century of the Middle Ages, the fifteenth, detached de- 
votional figures acquired a greater vogue. Yet it was only 
the dawning cult of art for art’s sake in the Renaissance that 
permanently restored substantive sculpture to the popularity 
that it had enjoyed among the Greeks and the Romans. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


The history of sculpture is traced, in connection with archi- 
tecture, painting, and the minor arts, in all general histories of 
art. Among these, S. Reinach’s Apollo, an Illustrated Manual of 
the History of Art throughout the Ages, New York, 1907, is 
undoubtedly the best brief outline that has yet been written. 
For a somewhat fuller account, accurate, enlightened, and up-to- 
date, the following works may be recommended: K. Woermann’s 
Geschichte der Kunst aller Zeiten und Volker, Leipzig, first edi- 
tion, 3 vols., 1900-1911; second edition completed through Vol. V, 
1915-20; A. Springer’s Handbuch der Kunstgeschichte, Leipzig, 
5 vols., frequently revised; and the second volume (in two parts) 
of P. Albert Kuhn’s Allgemeine Kunst-Geschichte, Einsiedeln, 
1909. E. Faure’s Histoire del’ Art, Paris, 4 vols., 1921, 1922 (now 


12 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


appearing in an English translation, New York) contains much 
interesting criticism and will be helpful to the student who al- 
ready has some knowledge. Useful brief accounts of the history 
of sculpture are A. Marquand and A. L. Frothingham’s Text-Book 
of the History of Sculpture, New York, 1899, and H. N. Fowler’s 
History of Sculpture, New York, 1916. 

By far the best lexicon of the artists of all times, absolutely 
indispensable to the student, is the Allgemeines Lexikon der 
bildenden Kiinstler, edited by U. Thieme and F. Becker, includ- 
ing now 16 volumes and having reached Heub- in the alphabet, 
Leipzig, 1907 ; the encyclopedic articles are by the most emi- 
nent specialists of all countries, and each is accompanied by an 
exhaustive bibliography. Despite the great achievements of re- 
search and criticism in the last twenty years, H. A. Miiller and 
H. W. Singer’s Allgemeines Kiinstler-Lexikon, Frankfort on the 
Main, 1895-1905, still has value, particularly for the sections of 
the alphabet not yet eovered by Thieme and Becker. For French 
sculpture from the Middle Ages to the present day, Stanislas 
Lami’s four Dictionnaires, Paris, 1898-1921, are sources for bio- 
graphical data and catalogues of works. 

The most ambitious attempt to trace the history of ancient art 
in detail is G. Perrot and C. Chipiez’s Histoire de Vart dans 
Pantiquité, of which 10 volumes have appeared, Paris, 1882-1914. 
©. Picard’s La sculpture antique des origines a Phidias, Paris, 
1923, traces the development of sculpture from the beginnings 
to the time of the great Greek masters, and is noteworthy for its 
clear presentation of recent discoveries and theories and for its 
excellent bibliographies. The best general history of modern art 
Gf “modern” be understood in its broadest sense) is the Histoire 
de Vart depuis les premiers temps jusqu ad nos jours, Paris, 
1905 , edited by A. Michel and written by the leading French 
scholars in collaboration; it has now been completed through 71 
volumes (each volume in two parts) and carries the reader 
through the first half of the eighteenth century. 

The most monumental history of Italian art is A. Venturi’s 
Storia dell’arte italiana, now numbering eight volumes (the 
seventh volume in four parts) and covering the subject through 
the painting, sculpture, and architecture of the fifteenth century, 
Milan, 1900-23; the achievement is valuable not only for its 
mature scholarship and wealth of illustrations, but also for its 
penetrating and brilliantly phrased characterizations. W. C. 
Water’s Italian Sculptors, London, 1911, is a convenient and 
moderately good dictionary of the plastic masters of Italy in the 


INTRODUCTION 13 


medieval, Renaissance, and baroque periods. C. Ricci’s Art in 
Northern Italy, 1911, is more intelligent in its condensation than 
some of the other handbooks of the Ars Una series (all published 
at New York in English). These other manuals, nevertheless, are 
the most satisfactory short histories of the art of the respective 
countries: L. Hourticq, Art in France, 1911; M. Rooses, Art in 
Flanders, 1914; W. Armstrong, Art in Great Britain and Ireland, 
1909; and M. Dieulafoy, Art in Spain and Portugal, 1913. 
L. Gonse’s La sculpture francaise depuis le XIV® siécle, Paris, 
1895, is too superficial to be of much service. W. Bode’s 
Geschichte der deutschen Plastik, on the other hand, though 
published as long ago as 1887, at Berlin, still needs to be consulted. 
The volumes of G. Dehio’s Handbuch der deutschen Kunst- 
denkmdaler, Berlin, 1906-14, constitute a full, scientific, and con- 
venient catalogue of the monuments of art throughout Germany. 
KE. Marchal, in La sculpture et les chefs-deuvre de Vorfévrerie 
belges, Brussels, 1895, has provided a copious source-book, includ- 
ing the whole history of plastic art in Belgium almost to the 
present day. Belgische Kunstdenkmdler, edited by P. Clemen, 
Munich, 1923, comprises a series of authoritative articles by 
various scholars on many phases of Flemish art. LL. Cloquet, in 
Les artistes wallons, Brussels, 1913, and R. Dupierreux, in La 
sculpture wallone, Brussels, 1914, present summary treatments 
of the district of Belgium implied in the titles. A standard work 
on Dutch art is G. Galland’s Geschichte der hollandischen 
Baukunst und Bildnerei, Frankfort on the Main, 1890; A. Pit’s 
La sculpture hollandaise aw Musée Nationale d Amsterdam, 
Amsterdam, 1902, touches illuminatingly upon the different 
periods. For Spain, P. Lafond’s La sculpture espagnole, Paris, 
1908, though all-inclusive, is too much a mere catalogue; A. F. 
Oalvert’s Sculpture in Spain, New York, 1912, is too light. The 
monumental works on the subject are M. Dieulafoy’s La statuaire 
polychrome en Hspagne, Paris, 1908, and E. Serrano Fatigati’s 
Escultura en Madrid, Madrid, 1912. L. Taft’s History of Amer- 
ican Sculpture, second edition, New York, 1924, has become a 
classic. 3 
The best large collections of photographic reproductions are: 
Brunn-Bruckmann-Arndt, Denkmdler griechischer und romischer 
Sculptur, 685 plates, Munich, 1888 (beginning with plate 501, 
elaborate discussions accompany the plates) and Grvechische und 
romische Portrats, Munich, 1891 ; P. Vitry and G. Briére, 
Documents de sculpture francaise (Middle Ages, Renaissance, 
and modern times), Paris, 1906 ; J. J. van Ysendyck, Docu- 


14 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


ments classés de l'art dans les Pays-Bas, Antwerp, 1880-1889; and 
G. Dehio and G. von Bezold, Die Denkmdler der deutschen 
Bildhauerkunst, Berlin, 1905 ; 

For the processes of sculpture, the following works may be 
consulted: G. Baldwin Brown, Vasari on Technique, London, 
1907; E. Lanteri, Modelling, London, 1904; A. Toft, Modelling 
and Sculpture, Philadelphia, 1911. 


CHAPTER II 
EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE 


Among the nations of antiquity, the Egyptians first de- 
veloped an important national art. Modern research has 
modified our ideas of the enormous age of the Egyptian 
monuments and has shown that in the valley of the Tigris 
and the Euphrates a significant civilization developed al- 
most, if not quite, as early as in the valley of the Nile. But 
of the early art of the Mesopotamian region, comparatively 
few monuments have been preserved, and the Egyptian 
artists clearly attained a high degree of skill before those of 
Babylonia and Chaldza, so that a history of sculpture 
naturally begins with Egypt. 

The civilization that arose and flourished in the Nile valley 
in ancient times maintained itself for many centuries and was 
little affected by that of other nations. Indeed, Egypt has 
always been a country which absorbed invading tribes, so 
that, in the case of Egyptian sculpture, more clearly than in 
that of other races, it is possible to trace the influences by 
which the art was moulded and under which it developed. 
Such influences are, in general, the physical features of the 
country, its political history, and the character and the 
beliefs of the people, especially their religious beliefs. To 
such influences we shall constantly refer as we consider the 
products of different regions. 

Physical conditions. Ancient Egypt, in a strict sense, com- 
prised only a part of the valley of the Nile, namely, the 
region north of the First Cataract, the last 550 miles of the 
river’s course, including the Delta. The physical conditions 
of this district favored the development of a great civiliza- 
tion. The warm and almost rainless climate and the fertility 
of the soil, constantly enriched by an annual deposit of silt 
from the inundation, made it possible for men to obtain the 

15 


16 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


necessities of life with comparatively little labor; the river 
afforded an easy means of communication between the dif- 
ferent parts of the country; and the deserts beyond the cliffs 
that bound the valley on either side served as natural de- 
fenses against enemies. On the other hand, the physical en- 
vironment exercised in some ways an unfavorable influence. 
The very ease with which the necessities of life were gained 
reacted to the disadvantage of the dwellers in this fortunate 
valley, and the isolation and the constant physical and cli- 
matic conditions are at least partially responsible for the con- 
servatism that is so marked in the character of the ancient 
Egyptians. Even in antiquity, the name of Egypt was syn- 
onymous with all that was fixed and unchanging. 

Political history. The history of ancient Egypt is made 
up of alternating periods of strength and weakness, as the 
country was united and controlled by powerful Pharaohs, or 
disrupted by internal dissension or foreign invasion. Fol- 
lowing a system devised by the priest Manetho, who in the 
third century B.C. wrote a history of Egypt, it is customary 
to arrange the rulers, from the beginning of the historic period 
(about 3400 B.C.) to the conquest of the country by Alex- 
ander the Great in 330 B.C., in thirty groups or Dynasties. 
Modern writers, furthermore, commonly distinguish four great 
“periods of power,” called respectively The Old Kingdom 
(Dyn. II-VI, about 2980-2475 B.C.), The Middle Kingdom 
(Dyn. XI and XII, about 2160-1788 B.C.), The Empire 
(Dyn. XVIII-XX, about 1580-1090 B.C.), and The Saite 
Period (Dyn. X XVI, 663-525 B.C.). It is these periods of 
power with which we have principally to do in any discussion 
of Egyptian art. The important periods in the history of 
sculpture (and of architecture and painting as well) were the 
same as the important periods in the political history, for it 
was the Pharaohs and the officers of their courts who under- 
took the erection and decoration of mighty temples dedicated 
to the gods, or of elaborate tombs for the preservation of their 
own bodies and for the ceremonies that were thought essential 
to the attainment of life after death. 

Religious beliefs. It is no exaggeration to say that almost 
all Egyptian sculpture was inspired, in one way or another, 


EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE Uff 


by religion. Both in work in the round and in work in relief, 
figures of the gods and figures of the Pharaohs, who were 
regarded as gods on earth and were at the head of the state 
religion, play a prominent part, and the temples of the gods 
formed one of the two types of monuments (temples and 
tombs) that were most elaborately adorned with sculpture. 
Most important of all is the curious form of the Egyptian 
belief in the life after death. Briefly stated, this was as 
follows: Man, after death, consisted of several parts: there 
was the body; the ka, or double, conceived as an exact replica 
of the body, but without material substance; the ba, or soul, 
often represented as a bird with a human head; and the khu, 
or “luminous,” a sort of spark from the divine fire, closely 
connected with the ba. Of these, as the Egyptian believed, 
the body and the ka remained in the tomb; the ba and the khu 
went forth to associate with the gods. For the attainment 
of immortality, it was necessary that all four elements should 
be preserved, the body and the ka by the preservation of the 
actual body, the soul and the “luminous” by the prayers and 
offerings of later generations. This belief led to many im- 
portant developments in sculpture. As the ka was thought 
of as closely associated with the body, it became customary 
to place in the tombs portrait statues of the dead, so that, if 
the body were accidentally destroyed, the ka might still have 
a presentment of the living man with which he could consort, 
as if he might be deceived into continuing his existence. 
Since the ka had need, in his life in the tomb, of the beings 
who had surrounded the man while he was among the living, 
statues or statuettes of his wife, his children, and his servants 
were placed in the tomb, along with the portrait statues 
of the occupant. As the bringing of offerings and prayers in 
perpetuity must necessarily be a doubtful matter, the offer- 
ings came to be represented in relief on the walls. Gradually 
the scope of these reliefs was extended; beginning with the 
representation of food, the Egyptians came to picture all 
the processes of the preparation of food, and finally many 
other scenes from daily life. 

The Prehistoric Age (before 3400 B.C.) and the Archaic 
Period (c. 3400-2980 B.C.). Of the first rude beginnings of 


18 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Egyptian art in the prehistoric age the excavations of the last 
forty years have given us a fairly definite idea. Small statu- 
ettes of wood, ivory, and stone, and even some larger statues, 
together with crude reliefs, show that already the craftsmen 
of Egypt had attacked the problem of representing the forms 
they saw about them. The succeeding archaic period of the 
IT and II Dynasties (sometimes called the Thinite period, from 
Thinis, the capital) was a time of rapid development. Some 
of the products of this age, especially the stele, or grave- 
stones, set up over the tombs of the Pharaohs, and tablets of 
schist, of which the purpose is uncertain, exhibit in their 
reliefs a delicacy of treatment rarely surpassed in later days. 

The Old Kingdom (Dyn. III-VI, about 2980-2475 B.C.). 
The School of Memphis. The first great flowering of 
Egyptian art, however, took place during the Old Kingdom, 
or, as it is sometimes called, the Memphite period. At 
this time, Memphis was the capital, and from the graveyard 
of Memphis, the great necropolis that extends for many 
miles along the edge of the desert to the west and the south- 
west of Cairo, almost all the preserved monuments of Old 
Kingdom sculpture have been recovered. The richest find- 
ing places have been the so-called mastabas, flat-topped 
tombs built for the great nobles. From these have come 
many statues of the occupants of the tombs, their families, 
and their servants, as well as great quantities of reliefs repre- 
senting almost every aspect of Egyptian life. The ruins of 
the temples, also, built by the Pharaohs in connection with 
the pyramids in which they were buried, have yielded im- 
portant representations of the rulers. The largest collection 
of these works is in the great museum at Cairo, but many 
have passed to other countries. In America, both the Metro- 
politan Museum in New York and the Museum of Fine Arts 
in Boston possess fine examples from the Old Kingdom. 

The Sherkh-el-Beled. What strikes one most forcibly in 
any collection of Old Kingdom sculpture is the marked realis- 
tic tendency. This is especially noticeable in figures drawn 
from the middle and lower classes. In these the endeavor of 
the artist was clearly to create, so far as lay in his power, a 
counterfeit of the living model. The most famous of all 


EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE 19 


statues of this period, the 
Sheikh-el-Beled (Fig. 1), 
brings vividly before us the 
type of the successful “‘self- 
made” man. The very name 
of the figure is a tribute to 
the skill of the maker. It 
means Village Chief, and 
was given to the statue by 
the Arab workmen who 
found it, because, when it 
came out of the sand, it 
looked so much like the 
chief of their village that 
they all with one accord 
cried out “Sheikh-el-Beled,” 
and Sheikh-el-Beled it has 
been called ever since. It 
represents a man in middle 
life, who clearly had not de- 
nied himself the pleasures 
of eating and drinking. The 
fleshy, stocky form, with 
the loin-cloth as the only 
garment, is admirably ren- 
dered, especially when one 
remembers that what we 
have is only the wooden 
core of the figure. As it 
stood originally, the surface 
was concealed by a covering 
of linen and plaster, in 
which, no doubt, some de- 
tails were added, and the 
whole was painted. But the 
most remarkable feature, 
after all, is the head, with its wonderful suggestion of self- 
satisfied well-being. Here, clearly, we have a faithful portrait. 
The ideals of the artist are best shown, perhaps, by the fact 


FIG. 1—THE SHEIKH-EL-BELED. 
MUSEUM, CAIRO 


20 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


that the eyes are formed by two pieces of white quartz and 
the pupils by bits of rock crystal, with a polished wooden nail 
at the centre. In spite of more recent discoveries, the Sheikh- 
el-Beled still remains one of the great masterpieces of the Old 
Kingdom. 

The Seated Scribe in the Louvre. Very similar in spirit, 
though less skilful in execution, is the Seated Scribe in the 
Louvre (Fig. 2), one of the 
finest examples of the large 
group of figures of servants 
and slaves that have come 
from the tombs of the Old 
Kingdom. This figure is of 
limestone and retains many 
traces of the paint with 
which it was covered. 
Ready to take his master’s 
dictation, he sits erect and 
alert. The posture, obvi- 
ously, made difficulties for 
the sculptor; the legs are 
abnormally heavy, and 
each foot has only three 
FIG. 2—SEATED SCRIBE. LOUVRE, PARIS. toes. But the upper body 

(PHOTO. GIRAUDON) shows careful study, with 

its flabby breast muscles 

and well-rendered collar bones; and the face was evidently 
studied from life. 

Statues of the Pharaohs. A rather different ideal appears 
in the figures of the Pharaohs, in which we can trace an 
attempt to pass beyond the facts of nature, that is, to ideal- 
ize. The reason is probably to be found in the conception 
of the ruler as a superhuman being, a descendant of the gods 
and their representative on earth. In the wonderfully pre- 
served group now in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (Fig. 
3), the faces doubtless reflect those of Menkure, the builder 
of the Third Pyramid at Gizeh, and his queen. But it is 
hardly likely that the faces of the originals displayed such 
great regularity of feature or so few wrinkles and other in- 


EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE 21 


dividual peculiarities; and the fixed smile is probably meant 
to suggest not only the gracious rulers of the land, but also 
superior beings, less subject than ordinary mortals to the 
troubles and griefs of actual human existence. These 
suspicions are confirmed by other portraits of the Pharaohs of 
the Old Kingdom, such as 
the great diorite Khafre in 
the Museum at Cairo and 
the Great Sphinx at Gizeh, 
which is now generally rec- 
ognized as another repre- 
sentation of this Pharaoh, 
the builder of the Second 
Pyramid. Such _ portraits 
differ considerably from one 
another and obviously were 
based on different originals, 
but all have in common the 
regular features, the smooth 
cheeks, and the fixed smile. 
These are also found in 
many statues of the Egyp- 
tian deities. 
Characteristics of Mem- 
phite sculpture. In the 
“masterpieces of the Mem- 
phite school, we see the best 
that the sculptors of the yg. 3—MeNKURE AND HIS QUEEN. 
Old Kingdom accomplished. MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS, BOSTON 
Many other statues of the 
period, naturally, are less impressive, being the work of less 
skilful artists or of local schools, remote from the centre 
of greatest activity. But any period should be judged by 
its best productions rather than by those of inferior merit, 
and the less successful statues betray the same ideal as those 
of the great masters, namely, the faithful reproduction of the 
subjects represented. Details of the body are often neglected 
or badly rendered, but in the faces, at least, the attempt at 
portraiture is always obvious. In the statues of the great 


22 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


nobles, as in those of the Pharaohs, we often suspect a 
slurring over of details, in an attempt to suggest the dignity 
and reserve that were evidently regarded as proper to the 
ruling caste. And throughout the production of the Mem- 
phite school, there is a tendency to what may be called 
suavity, that is, to smoothness and roundness of surface. 
But these idealizing tendencies are slight, at best, and never 
go so far as to obscure the portrait character of the work as 
a whole. | 

The law of frontahty. One noteworthy feature of these 
statues 1s the comparatively small number of poses repre- 
sented. The figures are almost all either standing or seated, 
and there is strict observance of what has come to be called 
the “law of frontality.” A piumb line dropped from the 
centre of the forehead would divide the figure in all cases 
into two equal parts. Arms and legs may be differently 
placed on the two sides, but there is no bending to right or 
to left, and the head always faces straight forward. The 
result is the stiffness of pose which is a marked feature of 
Egyptian work in the round. 

Polychromy. Another persistent feature is the use of color. 
Statues in softer materials, like wood or limestone, were 
apparently completely covered with paint; those made of 
harder stones or of bronze usually show some traces of color. 
The system was a conventional one. The flesh of men was 
regularly painted a dark red, that of women, light yellow; 
the drapery is usually white; hair and wigs are black; and 
all these colors, together with blue and green, were applied 
to diadems, necklaces, and other pieces of jewelry. The re- 
sult, in the rare instances where the color is well preserved, is 
a brilliant polychromy, which greatly enhances the lifelike 
effect. | 

Rehef sculpture. The reliefs of the Old Kingdom that have 
been preserved come almost exclusively from the elaborately 
decorated chapels of the tombs. The walls were commonly 
divided from bottom to top into a series of narrow fields, 
and in these were carved many scenes from Egyptian life, 
especially the bringing of offerings to the dead, the production 
of food, and games and sports of many kinds (Fig. 4). 


EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE 23 


Sometimes each field is occupied by a single subject; but not 
infrequently, by a convention which is common in the early 
art of many regions and which is sometimes called the 
continuous method of narration, more subjects than one are 
represented in the same field. The relief is commonly kept 
very low, with figures rising only slightly from the back- 
ground. A peculiarly Egyptian type is what is often called 
“sunk relief”; in this, each figure is worked in low relief at 
the bottom of a sinking in the stone (see Fig. 8 for an example 
from a later period). The workmanship is sometimes hasty, 


FIG. 4—RELIEFS FROM A TOMB-CHAMBER. MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS, BOSTON 


but the best of the reliefs are executed with great care and 
produce a charming decorative effect. This is much enhanced 
by the delicate and harmonious colors with which all were 
originally covered and which sometimes are remarkably well 
preserved. Closer inspection reveals many peculiarities in 
composition and in drawing. The principal figure in any 
scene is usually larger in scale than others. The individual 
figures regularly have the head in profile, with eye in front 
view, shoulders in front view, legs in profile, and body in a 
sort of three-quarters, tapering down to make the transition 
from the shoulders to the legs. Hands, too, are usually 
awkwardly rendered, with all the fingers displayed, and 


24 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


similar tendencies appear in the feet. The result is a certain 
stiffness and unnaturalness, which we recognize at once as 
characteristic of Egyptian reliefs and which justifies the 
adjective ‘‘conventional,” so often applied to them. Yet it 
is a striking tribute to the skill of the Egyptian sculptors that 
their conventional methods of representation detract little, 
if at all, from the pleasure one feels in the clear, graceful 
outlines, the delicate, rounded surfaces, and the pictures of 
Egyptian life. Even the conventional rendering of nature, 
by which water becomes a blue wash covered with zigzag 
black lines, and plants and trees are drawn with pattern- 
like regularity, has a distinct decorative value and in the 
actual reliefs is much less disturbing than might be imagined 
from a description. 

The Middle Kingdom (Dyn. XI and XII, about 2160-1788 
B.C.). The First Theban School. The period of disintegra- 
tion which followed the Sixth Dynasty has left but few monu- 
ments and those of no great importance. It was brought to 
an end by princes of Thebes in Upper Egypt, who once more 
established a strong central power and founded what is com- 
monly called the Middle Kingdom. The Theban Pharaohs 
organized their government along feudal lines, giving to the 
- local chiefs who acknowledged their sway more authority 
than they had enjoyed during the Old Kingdom. One 
result of this policy is that a number of local schools or 
groups of artists, working in different parts of the country 
for the great nobles, can be distinguished, sometimes with 
considerable clearness. The most important group, natur- 
ally, is made up of the men who worked for the rulers and 
who are conveniently called the First Theban School. We 
have a few early works of this group, which, although they 
are inferior in execution to the best products of the Old 
Kingdom, show a certain crude power and considerable origi- 
nality. But with the firm establishment of the Theban rule, 
the men of the Theban School began to imitate the earlier 
artists of Memphis, so that most of the work of this period 
continues the traditions of the Old Kingdom. There are 
some slight differences. In the statues of the Pharaohs of the 
Middle Kingdom, the heads seem usually less idealized than 


EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE 25 


those of the earlier kings and give an effect of more faithful 
portraiture (Fig. 5); in reliefs, the figures are carved a little 
higher, and there are rare instances of less conventional 
poses, suggesting a certain independence. But for the most 
part, the Theban artists, after they began to imitate the 


FIG. 5—SESOSTRIS I. MUSEUM, CAIRO 


mannerisms of the Memphites, remained their faithful fol- 
lowers. } 

The Empire (Dyn. XVIII-XX, about 1580-1090 B.C.). 
The Second Theban School. The First Theban period was 
succeeded by two centuries of confusion, from which few 
records have survived. The weakening of the central power 


26 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


was apparently followed by many struggles among the 
nobles, which so distracted the country that it fell an easy 
prey to foreign invaders called the Hyksos. They ruled 
Egypt for about a century, but were finally expelled by the 
princes of Thebes, who once more established a strong central 
government. Unlike their predecessors, the rulers of the 
Second Theban period aimed to destroy the power of the 
nobles. The local chiefs were largely exterminated, and their 


FIG. 6—COLOSSI OF RAMSES II. ABU SIMBEL 


lands reverted to the crown. The form of government thus 
established was clearly imperial in character, and the period, 
therefore, 1s commonly called the Empire. This was the 
most brilliant age in the whole history of Egypt. By a series 
of successful wars, the great Pharaohs of the XVIII Dynasty 
extended their sway, not only over all the neighboring regions 
of northeastern Africa, but also over a large part of western 
Asia, and most of the conquered regions were held for many 
years, though not without frequent struggles. With the 
tribute from this mighty empire, the kings built many tem- 
ples, partly for the worship of the gods, partly as adjuncts to 


EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE 27 


their own tombs, for the worship of the Pharaohs after death. 
All the temples were adorned with statues and reliefs, and the 
tombs themselves, for which the favorite type was now the 
“rock-cut” tomb, hollowed out of the cliffs, were elaborately 
decorated with reliefs and paintings. Of the quantities of 
richly embellished furniture 
and utensils deposited in 
these burial places the re- 
cently discovered tomb of 
Tutankhamen has __§fur- 
nished a remarkable illus- 
tration. 

Round sculpture: Colos- 
sal statues. The great ac- 
tivity in building and the 
enormous scale on which 
many of the structures of 
the Empire were planned 
are responsible for some of 
the changes that we can see 
in the sculpture of the time. 
Colossal statues, often 
many times life-size, be- 
came more common, no 
doubt because figures . of 
smaller size would have 
seemed out of scale with 
the walls and columns near 
which they were set up. FIG. 7—HEAD FROM A STATUE OF 
This tendency, to be sure, HARMHEB. MUSEUM, CAIRO 
was no new thing, for the 
love of the colossal was inherent in the Egyptian char- 
acter, as the Great Sphinx and some other early figures 
show, but it was undoubtedly encouraged by the large scale 
of the buildings of the Empire. The most famous examples 
that have survived in anything like good preservation are 
four seated figures of Ramses II, carved out of the cliff 
in front of a rock-cut temple at Abu Simbel in Nubia (Fig. 6). 
These are more than sixty-five feet in height. The tendency 


28 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


to somewhat slenderer proportions, also, appears in many 
figures of the Empire, and may possibly again be due to the 
scale of the buildings with which they were associated. At the 
same time, it is noticeable that for their types, in general, 
the sculptors of the Empire went back to earlier times for 
inspiration. The statues of the Second Theban period are 
regularly either standing or seated figures, posed like those 
of the Memphite and the First Theban schools. The portraits 
of the Pharaohs, though most of them are rather common- 


FIG. S—SETI I IN BATTLE. KARNAK 


place, sometimes show remarkable skill in characterization 
(Fig. 7), and there is the same tendency as in earlier times to 
concentrate attention on the heads and to slur over details of 
the bodies. 

Relvefs. The reliefs of the Empire, in many cases, betray 
careless execution, as if the maker were pressed for time or 
felt that on the great surface to be decorated, careful work 
would not be appreciated. In temple reliefs, naturally, the 
figures are frequently much larger than those of earlier date. 
The scheme of division into horizontal bands is often given 


EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE 29 


up and figures are scattered promiscuously over the wall (Fig. 
8). For the figures themselves, the same disturbing conven- 
tions continued in use, but in the best work, just as in earlier 
days, the delicacy of the details makes us almost forget the 
disregard of actual conditions in nature (Fig. 9). 


FIG. 9—SETI I MAKING OFFERINGS TO THE GODS. ABYDOS 


The reign of Ikhnaton (about 1375-1358 B.C.). Almost 
the only break with tradition during the period of the Empire 
is furnished by a series of works from the reign of Amenhotep 
IV, or, as he called himself, Ikhnaton. This king is famous 
as a religious reformer, who tried to introduce a monotheistic 
worship of the sun as the supreme god, in place of the estab- 


30 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


lished system. The statues and reliefs of his time differ from 
the mass of Egyptian works in that they show a more nat- 
uralistic rendering of the human figure (Fig. 10), with long, 
sharp face, small neck, protruding belly, and thin legs. Ap- 
parently, these traits are those of Ikhnaton himself, and 
were introduced into other figures out of flattery to the 
monarch. Perhaps they are merely characteristic of a local 
school at Akhetaton (the modern Tell el-Amarna), where 
Ikhnaton, deserting Thebes, 
built a new capital. At any 
rate, the tendency towards 
greater naturalism was only 
a passing fashion. It had 
little effect on later works, 
in which the sculptors re- 
turned to the older types. 
Saite Period —( Daas 
AXVI, 663-525 B.C.) The 
Egyptian Renaissance. The 
XXI to the XXV Dynasties 
mark another period of dis- 
integration, conveniently 
called the Period of Foreign 
Domination. The Pharaohs 
of this time, whose control 


FIG. 1O—IKHNATON AND HIS QUEEN. rarely extended beyond 
NEW MUSEUM, BERLIN. (FRomM von Egypt and Nubia and 


BISSING, “DENKMALER AGYPTISCHER gogmetimes embraced only 
SCULPTUR,” PL. 83) ream 
parts of those districts, 
were often not native Egyptians at all but foreigners; and at 
the end of the period, all Egypt was for a short time included 
in the Assyrian empire. From these troubled years, consider- 
able numbers of statues and reliefs are preserved, for the most 
part inferior to those of the Empire, but occasionally of such 
merit as to show that something of the Empire tradition sur- 
vived. A new era dawned with the expulsion of the Assyrian 
garrisons by Psamtik I, prince of Sais in the Delta, who 
gained control over the whole country. Under the Saite rulers, 
there appears to have been a real revival, both in literature 


EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE 31 


and in art, and the Saite period is often called the Egyptian 
Renaissance. The name is justified by the monuments of the 
time, since the attempt to imitate earlier works is everywhere 
apparent. It was especially the art of the Old Kingdom which 
appealed most strongly to the Saite artists, with the result 
that in their statues we find again the realistic tendency of the 
first dynasties. But the Saite sculptors went further than their 
models, and the heads of this 
period often exhibit remarkable 
skill in the rendering of distinc- 
tive traits (Fig. 11). Especially 
marked is the care expended on 
the bony structure of the skull 
and the wrinkles of the skin. At 
the same time, the bodies are 
carved in the ancient manner, 
and rarely show any individual 
peculiarities. 

Reliefs. In reliefs, the figures 
are once more arranged in hori- 
zontal bands and executed with 
all the purity of line and deli- 
cacy of the Old Kingdom. 
Among the interesting relics of 
Saite art are the “sculptor’s 
models’—small pieces of lime- 
stone, carved with figures in Fia. 1l—porTRAIT HEAD OF THE 
Wamouswmtages ol-completeness, “ romon 
or with a single head, or hand, 
or foot, or a single animal— 
examples of which are to be found in almost every collection. 
These were clearly used in the instruction of young artists, 
and are often remarkable for their fine detail. They empha- 
size once more the persistence of traditional methods which is 
such a marked feature of all Egyptian art. Evidently, at this 
time, the copying of established forms was regarded as the 
ideal method of training a sculptor, and the study of nature, 
without which the highest development in any art is impos- 
sible, was sadly neglected. 


32 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Later Egyptian sculpture. The Saite period represents the 
last important phase of Egyptian sculpture, although many 
monuments are preserved from the succeeding ages of Persian, 
Greek, and Roman rule. After the conquest by Alexander, a 
certain amount of Greek influence can sometimes be seen in 
statues and reliefs. But, in general, the Egyptian remained 
true to his ideals. Even in work of the Roman age, the 
intention to follow the ancient models is clear, though the 
execution is usually far inferior to that of earlier times. 

General character of Egyptian sculpture. The most strik- 
ing quality of Egyptian sculpture is its unchanging character: 
The types for seated and standing statues and for figures in 
relief established during the Old Kingdom continued in use, 
with only slight variations, throughout the later periods. 
The persistence of types is the more significant in view of the 
very great skill which the Egyptian sculptors obviously 
possessed. They did not hesitate to attack the hardest 
materials, such as granite, basalt, and serpentine. Their 
power of observation is shown in the very successful charac- 
terization which distinguishes their portrait heads, in their 
rendering of the physical peculiarities and un-Egyptian dress 
of foreigners, and in their remarkably lifelike representation 
of animals. It is possible, of course, that the unchanging 
nature of the types is due, as has often been suggested, 
to the conservatism and aversion to novelty characteristic of 
the ancient Egyptians. But a much more reasonable explana- 
tion is that the types continued in use because they satisfied 
the sculptors and their patrons and really expressed the 
ideals of the Egyptians in regard to what is fitting in sculp- 
ture. 

Influence of Egyptian sculpture. That these Egyptian 
ideals did not greatly appeal to other races is not surprising. 
The Egyptian style was rarely followed by sculptors of other 
lands, and almost always as a matter of conscious imitation. 
The Pheenicians frequently copied Egyptian types for small 
figures in bronze or ivory or clay, or for the decoration of 
bronze and silver bowls and other utensils. These, together 
with small figures and utensils of Egyptian manufacture, 
were carried by Phoenician merchants to all the lands 


EGYPTIAN SCULPTURE 33 


around the Mediterranean, and occasionally inspired emula- 
tion in regions remote from Egypt. There are some evi- 
dences of Egyptian influence in the earliest Greek sculpture, 
as we shall see, and Egyptian forms were imitated not in- 
frequently in the Roman age. But, for the most part, the 
Egyptian style remained peculiar to the inhabitants of the 
Nile valley, and, except for certain decorative patterns, es- 
pecially those derived from the lotus, had little effect on the 
art of other peoples. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


Although it was published in 1882, the chapter on Egyptian 
sculpture in the first volume of Perrot and Chipiez’s elaborate 
Histoire de Vart dans lantiquité is still one of the best discus- 
sions of the subject. (The English translation by W. Armstrong 
was published under the title Art in Egypt, in 2 vols., London, 
1883.) G. Maspero’s Manual of Egyptian Archeology, New York, 
6th ed., 1914, contains a brief historical account; his Art in 
Egypt, New York, 1912 (Ars Una series), lists many more monu- 
ments and attempts to distinguish the work of local schools. 
Hedwig Fechheimer’s Die Plastik der Mgypter, Berlin, 2d ed., 
1922, is an interesting endeavor, with many excellent illustrations, 
to evaluate Egyptian sculpture from an esthetic point of view. 

The earliest monuments are conveniently brought together in 
J. Capart’s Primitive Art in Egypt, London, 1905. L. Borchardt’s 
Kunstwerke aus dem Museum, Cairo, 1912, publishes in 50 plates, 
with a brief text, many of the treasures of the great museum in 
Cairo. F. W. von Bissing’s Denkmdler dgyptischer Sculptur, 
Munich, 1914, with 150 plates and explanatory text, is similar 
in character, but laid out on broader lines. J. Capart’s [art 
égyptien, Brussels, 2 vols., 1909, 1911, provides in a cheaper form 
reproductions of a large number of monuments, with excellent 
bibliographical references. 

The best political history of Egypt is J. H. Breasted’s History 
of Egypt from the Earliest Times to the Persian Conquest, New 
York, 2d ed., 1909. 


CHAPTER III 
MESOPOTAMIAN SCULPTURE 


While the Egyptian sculptors of the Old Kingdom were 
working out the forms which were modified, but never aban- 
doned, by their successors, another civilization, destined to 
exercise a greater influence on the art of later times, was 
developing in the valley of the Tigris and the Euphrates, 
the district which is most conveniently called Mesopotamia. 

Physical environment. Mesopotamia seems, in many ways, 
a less favorable region for the evolution of a great 
civilization than Egypt. At the present day, a large part of 
the country is a desert. But this is due to the neglect of the 
elaborate system of canals by which, in antiquity, the waters 
of the rivers were regulated. Herodotus and other writers 
mention the fertility of the land in ancient times, and show 
that its prosperity was largely due to agriculture. Com- 
merce, too, played its part, for through this valley runs one 
of the oldest trade routes of the world, connecting the eastern 
shore of the Mediterranean and Asia Minor with India and 
the Far East. 

For the development of sculpture, the conditions clearly 
were less advantageous than in Egypt. The lower part of the 
valley, the ancient Babylonia and Chaldza, is a great allu- 
vial plain, with no stone and no trees of any size except the 
palm, the wood of which is small and fibrous. In this dis- 
trict, therefore, the materials for sculpture had always to be 
imported. In the upper valley of the Tigris, where the 
Assyrian power developed, there are deposits of limestone and 
alabaster, and forests of oak, pine, cypress, and beech cover 
the nearby hills. But the limestone and alabaster cannot be 
quarried easily except in slabs, and the Assyrians never de- 
veloped carving in wood. Mesopotamian sculpture, there- 

34 


MESOPOTAMIAN SCULPTURE 35 


fore, is mostly sculpture in relief, though figures in the round 
are sometimes found, often made of very hard imported 
stone. 

Political history. The Early Babylonian Period (about 
3000-1275 B.C.). The dominant tribes in Mesopotamia dur- 
ing most of the historical period were Semitic, but it is clear 
that much of their culture was derived from a non-Semitic 
people called the Sumerians, who occupied the lower part of 
the valley before the coming of the Semites. Thanks to the 
system of writing which the Sumerians invented—the so- 
called cuneiform system, named from its wedge-shaped char- 
acters—a good deal is known about the history of Baby- 
lonia. As early as 3000 B.C., there were flourishing cities, 
some. Sumerian, some Semitic. We have records of wars 
between the cities and with the Elamites on the east; of 
“dynasties” in different cities, which gained control over the 
whole district or large parts of it; and of occasional expedi- 
tions to the north and the west, sometimes as far as the Syrian 
coast. Ultimately, about 2100 B.C., the leadership fell to the 
Semitic city of Babylon, which thenceforth remained the 
most important centre in the lower valley, and for several 
centuries was the capital of a powerful kingdom. 

Assyrian Ascendancy (about 1275-607 B.C.). During the 
second millennium, the supremacy of Babylon was challenged 
by a new power in the upper valley of the Tigris, the kingdom 
of the Assyrians. As early as 1650, the Assyrians succeeded 
in asserting their independence, and about 1275, they even 
conquered Babylon itself. With this event, Assyria, rather 
than Babylonia, became the dominant district, although the 
Assyrian control was not maintained uninterruptedly. The 
period of greatest Assyrian power was from 885 to 626, 
when a succession of strong rulers brought most of western 
Asia, and even Egypt for a short time, under their sway. 
The most important of these rulers, from whose palaces the 
greater part of the Assyrian sculpture that we have has been 
recovered, were Ashurnasirpal (885-860), Sargon II (722- 
705), Sennacherib (705-681), and Ashurbanipal (668-626). 

Later Babylonian Period (607-538 B.C.). The wars by 
which the Assyrian monarchs conquered and controlled their 


36 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


empire were waged with the utmost cruelty. Revolts against 
them were frequent, and at last their empire was destroyed by 
a revolt of the Babylonians in alliance with the Medes. — In 
607, Nineveh, the later capital of Assyria, was taken and 
utterly destroyed, and Babylon once more became, for a 
few years, mistress of the valley. The most important king 
of this time was the famous Nebuchadnezzar (604-561), who 
rebuilt Babylon on a splendid scale. But under his successor, 
the city was captured by Cyrus, and the Babylonian kingdom 
was absorbed into the Persian Empire. 

Religious beliefs. The religious beliefs of the Mesopota- 
mian peoples did not exercise so powerful an influence on 
their art as did those of the Egyptians. Figures of the gods, 
often distinguished from human beings by the addition of 
wings, are frequent in their reliefs, but usually associated 
with representations of the rulers. Belief in the life after 
death led to no development of elaborate tombs. Most Meso- 
potamian sculpture comes from the palaces of the kings and 
is devoted to the glorification of the rulers. 

Early Babylonian Period (about 3000-1275 B.C.). Round 
sculpture. The most important group of early sculptures 
that has yet been recovered from Babylonia comes from 
the mound of Tello, the site of the Sumerian city of Lagash. 
The group includes a number of statues of Gudea, who was 
priest-king, or patesz, of Lagash about 2450 B.C. There are 
several headless bodies and a number of heads, only one of 
which, curiously enough, could be fitted to any of the 
bodies (Fig. 12). The material is diorite, a hard, volcanic 
stone, which must have been imported. Certain disturbing 
traits are at once obvious—the over large head, the squat, 
heavy proportions, the inscription which covers most of the 
robe, the badly carved feet and ankles, the conventional ren- 
dering of the eyebrows as a pair of perfectly regular sinkings, 
with scratched oblique lines to indicate the separate hairs. 
But other features show that this is by no means the work 
of a primitive artist. The muscles of the right arm are 
rendered with approximate correctness, the shape of the 
eye is carefully studied, and the little pads of flesh at the 
corners of the mouth give to the face a lifelikeness that com- 


MESOPOTAMIAN SCULPTURE 37 


pares favorably with the best Egyptian achievements of the 
Old Kingdom. An even more favorable impression of the 
sculptors of Lagash is gained from one of the headless figures, 
which represents Gudea with a tablet on his knees, on which 


FIG. 12—GUDEA. LOUVRE, PARIS. (FROM CROS, ‘“‘NOUVELLES FOUILLES DE 
TELLO, PL. 1) 


is worked out a plan for a building. In this, the proportions 
are much better, and the details of hands and feet show pains- 
taking effort. 

Relefs. The Vulture Stele. The mound of Tello has 
yielded numerous fragments of early reliefs, all, unfortu- 
nately, badly mutilated. The most interesting come from the 


38 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


so-called Vulture Stele, on which was recorded the victory 
of Eannatum, an early patest of Lagash (about 2900 B.C.), 


FIG. 13—STELE OF NARAM-SIN. LOUVRE, PARIS 


over the neighboring city of Umma.t Many events of the 
campaign are pictured—Eannatum leading his troops into 
battle, the burial of the dead under a tumulus of earth, 


*Cf. De Sarzec, Découverts en Chaldée, pls. 3 and 4. 


MESOPOTAMIAN SCULPTURE 39 


vultures carrying off the heads of slain enemies, as well as 
Ningirsu, the god of Lagash, holding a net filled with bodies 
of the men of Umma. The execution is careful, and in spite 
of certain awkwardnesses of drawing, the reliefs tell their 
story with remarkable vividness. 

The Stele of Naraém-Sin. Much better for study, because 
better preserved, is the Stele of Naram-Sin, found some years 
ago on the site of Susa, where it had been carried from 
Babylonia by an Elamite king (Fig. 13). It is an irregular 
block of limestone, something over six feet high, set up 
originally about 2600 B.C. by Naram-Sin, king of the Semitic 
city of Agade, to commemorate his victories. The king is 
represented as he marches over hilly, wooded country at 
the head of his victorious army. The hills are suggested by 
a great cone in the upper part of the relief and by irregular 
ground lines under the feet of the king and his soldiers; 
a single tree symbolizes the forests. Before the king are his 
enemies, some dead, others dying, others holding up their 
hands in supplication, while above appear the stars that 
“fought in their courses” for Naram-Sin. Many of the 
conventions of early relief, such as we found in the products. 
of Egyptian sculptors, are noticeable here—the arrangement 
of the figures one above another with no regard to relations 
in nature, the representation of the king as larger: than the 
rest, the contorted forms with legs in profile, shoulders in 
front view, and eye in front view when the head is in profile. 
Several traits, however, recall the statues from Tello. The 
poses of the figures are vigorous and full of life; the muscles 
are heavy, the shoulders broad and square; and a long in- 
scription is carved across the face of the relief. The whole 
seems to be the work of a sculptor who aimed to reproduce 
life as he saw it, and to suggest, to the best of his ability, 
the power of the king, his master. 

Assyrian Ascendancy (about 1275-607 B.C.). From the 
later centuries of the Early Babylonian period, very little 
sculpture has been preserved, and from the earlier years of 
the Assyrian ascendancy, also, comparatively few works are 
known. It is not until we reach the reign of Ashurnasirpal 
(885-860 B.C.) that we have a large number of monuments 


40 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


for study. Then, for nearly three centuries, the palaces of 
the Assyrian monarchs furnish plentiful material for tracing 
the history of Assyrian sculpture. 

Round sculpture. The statue of Ashurnasirpal. The best 
example of Assyrian sculpture in the round is the almost 
perfectly preserved figure 
of Ashurnasirpal found in 
the ruins of his palace by 
Sir Henry Layard (Fig. 
14). The contrast between 
this statue and the seated 
figures of Gudea is surpris- 
ing. Such naturalness as 
was attained by the artists 
of the earlier period is en- 
tirely gone, and in its place 
we find a highly conven- 
tional manner of represent- 
ing the human body. Ashur- 
nasirpal stands stiffly erect, 
dressed in a heavy robe. In 
this there is no attempt to 
render the folds of the 
material; only the heavy 
fringes seem to have inter- 
ested the sculptor. In those 
parts of the body that are 
not concealed by the robe, 
the forms are remarkably 
lifeless. The right arm is 
almost cylindrical in sec- 

tion, with little or no sug- 

FIG. 14—ASHURNASIRPAL. BRITISH MU- : 
SEUM, LONDON. (PHOTO. MANSELL) gestion of the muscles, the 
toes are hardly more than 
projecting knobs. But it is in the face that the conventional 
character of the work is most evident. The large eyes are as 
exaggerated in size as those of the early heads from Tello, 
and with their projecting masses are even more unnatural. 
The eyebrows are rendered by sinkings. Cheeks and chin 


ay 


MESOPOTAMIAN SCULPTURE 41 


are covered by a heavy beard, treated in vertical bands, with 
oblique hatchings alternating with small squares decorated 
in regular, spiral curls. The features are markedly Semitic, 
with a strongly arched, aquiline nose. There is, perhaps, a 
certain suggestion of power in this heavy, immobile figure, 
but as a work of sculpture it falls far below the statues from 
Tello. The other Assyrian statues that have been preserved 
show the same qualities. 

Relief sculpture. For the study of Assyrian sculpture in 
relief, our material is abundant. Most of it comes from the 
palaces of the kings, no less than seven of which have been 
discovered in the mounds that mark the site of Nineveh and 
other Assyrian cities. The reliefs, carved in alabaster or 
limestone, were used as a revetment along the base of the 
mud-brick walls of the more important apartments and about 
the doorways. The technique, for the most part, is low relief. 

Guardian monsters and animals. There is, however, one 
group of monuments that may be called high relief, or better, 
perhaps, a sort of compromise between high relief and sculp- 
ture in the round, namely, the figures of monsters and ani- 
mals which were frequently placed about the entrances of 
the palaces. These stand out boldly from the slabs in which 
they are cut, but present a further peculiarity in that the 
relief is carried around the edge of the slab. The commonest 
types are monsters, with the body of a bull or a lion, the 
wings of a bird, and the head of a man (Fig. 15). They were 
conceived, no doubt, as guardians of the king’s residence, 
powerful beings combining the strength of the bull or the 
lion with the swiftness of the eagle and the intelligence of 
man, an idea not unlike that of the cherubim of Jewish tra- 
dition. In them the conventionality that we noted in the 
statue of Ashurnasirpal is even more in evidence. The faces 
are carved in the same manner as the face of the king. The 
great muscles of the legs are simply outlined by deep grooves. 
The feathers of the wings and the flocks of hair along the 
belly are pattern-like in their regularity. But the most re- 
markable departure from nature is that each of the mon- 
sters has five legs. The sculptor has tried, in a way that is 
common in early and primitive art, to combine two aspects 


42 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


of the same figure. Seen from the front, as the visitor ap- 
proached the palace, the guardian genius was to appear to 
be standing quietly; as the visitor passed through the portal, 
the monster was to seem to be advancing; and so, behind 
the two firmly planted forelegs, a third foreleg was carved. 


FIG. 15—GUARDIAN MONSTER FROM THE PALACE OF ASHURNASIRPAL. 
BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON. (PHOTO. MANSELL) 


Even where the guardian is not a monster, but a lion, the 
fifth leg almost always appears. 

Historical reliefs. The great mass of Assyrian sculpture 
is in low relief, carved by the simple process of drawing the 
figures on the stone and cutting away the background. Here 
again, as in Assyrian round sculpture, the style is more con- 


MESOPOTAMIAN SCULPTURE 43 


ventional than in the work of the Early Babylonian period. 
There are, however, some variations between the reliefs from 
different reigns, and we can trace a certain development, cul- 
minating in the reliefs of Ashurbanipal. One common trait, 
which these reliefs share with those of Egypt, is the com- 
bination of successive scenes in a single composition. 
Reliefs of Ashurnasirpal (885-860 B.C.). The earliest 
large series of reliefs is that from the palace of Ashurnasirpal. 


. FIG. 16—ASHURNASIRPAL AND A PROTECTING DEITY. BRITISH MUSEUM, 
> LONDON. (PHOTO. MANSELL) 


The subjects represented are those most frequent in the 
palace reliefs, namely, fighting and hunting. Figure 16 is 
taken from one of the hunting scenes, and represents the king, 
equipped with a bow and two arrows and attended by a 
protecting deity. In the heads, eye and hair and beard are 
rendered in the same unnatural forms as in the Assyrian 
statues; and although the heavy muscles of the forearm are 
suggested with some approach to correctness, the bared left 
leg of the god betrays only too clearly the sculptor’s disre- 
gard of anatomical relations and dependence on conventional 


44 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


methods. His principal interest seems to have been in the 
heavy fringes of the robe and other details of costume; it is 
noteworthy that the inscription, which is carved straight 
across the relief, is not allowed to interfere with the working 
out of the fringe. 

Such reliefs as these, in which no attempt is made to 
suggest the setting of the figures, are the most successful that 
the sculptors of Ashurnasirpal’s reign produced. In most 
cases, when they undertook to portray more complicated ac- 
tion, they fell into the same difficulties as their contempo- 
raries in Egypt, and evolved a purely conventional method 
of suggesting relations in space (Fig. 17). The lower part of 


FIG. 17—-FUGITIVES SWIMMING TO A FORTRESS. FROM THE PALACE OF 
ASHURNASIRPAL. BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON. (PHOTO. MANSELL) 


the field seems to have been thought of as nearer to the 
spectator than the upper, but the figures in the upper por- 
tion are no smaller than those of the lower, and nowhere is 
there evidence of any knowledge of the perspective. Hilly 
country is indicated by groups of triangular projections; 
water, by wavy grooves; the battlements of a city are no 
taller than the Assyrians who attack them. The artists of 
Ashurnasirpal apparently realized their inability to render 
complicated scenes successfully, and rarely introduced 
details of landscape unless these were demanded by the 
subject. This is true, also, of most of the work produced 
during the reigns of the other kings of the ninth and the 
eighth centuries. 


MESOPOTAMIAN SCULPTURE 45 


Reliefs of Sargon II (722-705 B.C.). The most important 
reliefs of the eighth century are those from the palace of 
Sargon II at Khorsabad, in which there is some advance 
over earlier work (Fig. 18). The human figures are not quite 
so squat and heavy; hair and beard are rendered a little more 
naturally ; the eyes are not completely in front view, although 
they are not correctly foreshortened; and the inscriptions 
no longer run completely across the figures. 

Reliefs of Sennacherib (705-681 B.C.). In the reliefs of 
Sennacherib, further changes appear. The sculptors of this 
reign seem to revel in details of landscape, and because of 


FIG. 18—RELIEF FROM THE PALACE OF SARGON II. LOUVRE, PARIS. 
(PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 


this their reliefs are often called “picturesque,” in the sense 


that they introduce details more proper to painting than to 
sculpture. Most of the reliefs from Sennacherib’s palace are 
devoted to his victorious campaigns, but one interesting 
series represents the building of the palace itself. A single 
slab from this series (Fig. 19) will serve to illustrate the 
tendencies of the time. The subject is the transportation of 
building materials on the Tigris. The essential features are 
the river and the two boats loaded with stone, but to these the 
sculptor has added many details—the trees along the nearer 
bank, the fish in the stream, and two fishermen riding on in- 
flated skins, with fish-baskets on their backs. The whole is 
a sort of elaborate picture-writing, which tells the story with 


46 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


absolute clearness, but practically without regard to relations 
in nature. 

Reliefs of Ashurbanipal (668-626 B.C.). The tendency 
to picturesqueness was only temporary. In the reliefs from 
the palace of Ashurbanipal, there is a return to the simpler 
manner (Fig. 20). These reliefs are unquestionably the best 
that the artists of Assyria produced. With the exception of 
the eyes, the figures are, in general, correctly drawn in 


FIG. 19—TRANSPORTATION OF BUILDING MATERIALS. BRITISH MUSEUM, 
LONDON. (PHOTO. MANSELL) 


profile, and the forms, though still heavy, are somewhat 
more graceful than those of earlier times. The patterns on 
the robes and the details of harness and other equipment 
are carved with the utmost care and with no little feeling 
for decorative effect. But it is above all to the skilful rep- 
resentation of animals that this series owes its fame. In 
the great hunting scenes that form the subjects of many 
of Ashurbanipal’s reliefs, horses and dogs, wild asses and 
lions are carved with remarkable dexterity and bear witness 


MESOPOTAMIAN SCULPTURE 47 


FIG. 20—ASHURBANIPAL HUNTING. BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON. 
(PHOTO. MANSELL) 


to developed powers of observation. A single specimen, 
but one that is generally regarded as the masterpiece of 


FIG. 2I—THE WOUNDED LION 


SS. BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON. (PHOTO. 
MANSELL) 


Assyrian sculpture, the Wounded Lioness (Fig. 21), will serve 
to show the high quality. The figure is only one of many, 
a mere detail in one of the great hunting scenes. The lioness 


48 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


has been struck by three arrows, one of which has severed 
the spinal cord and paralyzed her hind quarters. Yet even 
in this condition, she tries to pull herself forward and fight 
on. One may cavil at the attachment of the forelegs and 
the pattern-like rendering of the flowing blood, but no one can 
deny that the whole is instinct with life. The wrinkled 
muzzle, the mouth, open in a snarl of rage and pain, and the 


FIG. 22—RELIEFS ON THE GATE OF ISHTAR. BABYLON. (FROM KOLDEWEY, 
“DAS ISCHTAR-TOR IN BABYLON,” PL. 27) 


useless legs dragging along the ground show the hand of an 
artist worthy to rank with the great masters of animal 
sculpture of all ages. 

Later Babylonian Period (607-538 B.C.). From literary 
accounts it is clear that the later Babylonian period witnessed 
a renaissance of art in Babylon. The city, as it was rebuilt 
by Nebuchadnezzar, is spoken of with admiration by many 
later writers. As yet, we have comparatively few monuments 


MESOPOTAMIAN SCULPTURE 49 


to confirm their glowing accounts. The most important relics 
of sculpture are the figures of animals and monsters that 
formed the decoration of the Ishtar Gate and the so-called 
Processional Street (Fig. 22). These are worked out in clay 
bricks, enamelled in brilliant colors. Some of the figures are 
flat, but others are modelled in low relief. The modelling is 
somewhat more formal than in the best animal reliefs of 
Ashurbanipal, but not more so than is appropriate in dec- 
orative figures of this sort, and the whole series produces a 
favorable impression of the skill of the artists of the Neo- 
Babylonian period. 

Use of color. The reliefs in enamelled brick suggest that 
color may have been used on Mesopotamian works in stone, 
and this suggestion is confirmed by the reports of Layard 
and other explorers who saw the stones as they were taken 
from the ground. Their statements show that in some in- 
stances, at least, details like the hair of the figures and the 
harnesses of horses were picked out in color. But all traces 
of paint have now disappeared, and it is impossible to gain 
an exact idea of this feature of the work. It is reasonably 
sure, however, that color was not so extensively employed 
as an adjunct to sculpture as it was in Egypt. 

General character of Mesopotamian sculpture. Taken as a 
whole, Mesopotamian sculpture is heavy and monotonous. 
Its types and its range of subjects are much more restricted 
than those of Egyptian art. Throughout the centuries of 
their activity, the Mesopotamian sculptors adhered to the 
single type of heavily draped figure, with fixed, unsmil- 
ing countenance, and devoted themselves almost exclusively 
to the glorification of the sovereign. Female figures are al- 
most non-existent in their works, and distinctions between 
different races or classes in society were rarely attempted. 
In its force and vigor, this art reflects the character of the 
race that produced it, but it lacks grace and delicacy, just as 
the people themselves seem to have been deficient in those 
qualities. Only in the representation of animals does it 
attain anything approaching greatness. 

Influence of Mesopotamian sculpture. Although the prod- 
ucts of the Mesopotamian sculptors are not so pleasing to 


50 A HISTORY OF SOULE ha: 


our eyes as those of the Egyptians, they exercised a much 
more powerful influence on the art of other nations. The 
numerous monuments of early sculpture that have been 
found in Asia Minor—works of Hittite, Phrygian, and Lydian 
artists—are almost all conceived in Mesopotamian forms. 
There are, to be sure, early works of Hittite sculpture, such 
as the rock-cut reliefs at Boghaz-Keui, which were carved 
before the Hittites came into close relations with the peoples 
of the Euphrates valley and which show greater independence. 
But with this exception, the forms evolved by the sculp- 
tors of Mesopotamia appear to have dominated the art of 
Asia Minor until the development of Greek art in Ionia in 
the sixth century. In Syria, we find a similar state of affairs. 
The few monuments of Phcenician sculpture that are known 
suggest Mesopotamian inspiration; and Assyrian motifs, no 
less than types derived from Egypt, were used by the Phceni- 
cian craftsmen and, through the Phcenician merchants, trans- 
mitted to the west. The early sculpture of Cyprus, which was 
colonized by the Phcenicians, and which, at one time (about 
709-705 B.C.), acknowledged the suzerainty of the Assyrian 
kings, was largely derived from Assyrian models.' 

But it is not only towards the west that the influence of 
Mesopotamian sculpture can be traced. It is no less evident 
in Persia, where the monuments of the great Persian kings 
continue the traditions of Babylonia and Assyria. The reliefs 
from the tombs of the kings near Persepolis, as well as those 
from the palaces of Xerxes and Artaxerxes at Persepolis and 
Susa, were clearly inspired by the reliefs of the Mesopotamian 
monarchs. In some respects, especially in attempts to render 
the folds of garments more naturally, the Persian reliefs mark 
an advance, which is, no doubt, to be attributed to contact 
with Greek art. But the heavily draped, impassive figures 


* After the conquest of Cyprus by Amasis, a Pharaoh of the Saite 
period, Egyptian influence is very evident in Cypriote sculpture. 
Later still, the influence of Greek art can be seen. But the products 
of the Cypriote sculptors almost universally suffer from stiffness and 
conventionality, and sometimes from careless workmanship. Their 
interest is more archeological than esthetic. The great Cesnola 
Collection of Cypriote antiquities in the Metropolitan Museum in 
New York contains many remarkable examples of Cypriote sculpture. 


- 1884 


MESOPOTAMIAN SCULPTURE o1 


are essentially Mesopotamian, and prove, once more, the 
powerful influence exerted by Mesopotamian art on the art of 
other peoples. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


The discussion of Mesopotamian sculpture in Perrot and 
Chipiez’s Histoire de Vart dans Vantiquité, Vol. II, 1884 (English 
translation in two volumes, London, 1884) is accurate and very 
fully illustrated. For a more concise statement, P. S. P. Hand- 
cock’s Mesopotamian Archeology, New York, 1912, or E. Babe- 
lon’s Manual of Oriental Archeology, New York, new edition, 
1906, may be consulted. B. Meissner’s Grundztge der baby- 
lonisch-assyrischen Plastik, Leipzig, 1915, is useful especially 
for its full treatment of the early monuments. The history of 
the discoveries in Mesopotamia is interestingly recounted in 
H. V. Hilprecht’s Hxplorations in Bible Lands, Philadelphia, 
1903. Among the writings of the early explorers, A. H. Layard’s 
Nineveh and its Remains, London, 2 vols., 1849, may be heartily 
recommended. KE. de Sarzee’s Découverts en Chaldée, Paris, 
, contains an account of the early monuments found at 
Tello, with excellent plates. The best political history is R. W. 
Rogers’s History of Babylonia and Assyria, New York, 6th ed., 
2 vols., 1915. M. Jastrow’s The Civilization of Babylonia and 
Assyria, Philadelphia, 1915, is an authoritative work on the 
culture of the Mesopotamian peoples. 

The history of art in other districts of western Asia is most 
fully treated in Vols. III-V of Perrot and Chipiez’s Histoire: 
Vol. III, Phénicie, Cypre, 1885; Vol. IV, Sardaigne, Syrie, 
Cappodoce, 1887; Vol. V, Phrygie, Lydie et Carie, Lycie, 1890. 
(All of these are available in English translations.) Babelon’s 
Manual of Oriental Archewology contains chapters on the art of 
Persia, as well as on the art of Mesopotamia. For the art of 
the Hittites, J. Garstang’s The Land of the Hittites, London, 
1910, is useful. An excellent introduction to the history of 
Cypriote art is furnished by J. L. Myres’s Handbook of the 
Cesnola Collection of Antiquities, New York, 1915. 


CHAPTER IV 
GREEK SCULPTURE: THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 


The prehistoric “Aigean” age (about 3000-1100 B.C.). 
Civilization in Greece was long believed to have developed 
much later than in Egypt and in Mesopotamia. But the 
explorations begun by Schliemann and continued by a whole 
company of later explorers during the past fifty years have 
shown that between 3000 and 1100 B.C., roughly, there 
sprang up and flourished in the lands around the Atgean Sea 
a civilization of remarkable brilliancy, which is now generally 
called the Avgean civilization. The people among whom this 
culture arose were very surely not Greeks. The Greek-speak- 
ing tribes apparently came in during the latter part of the 
AXgean period, and it was through the fusion of the prehis- 
toric stock and the Greek tribes that the Greek people of 
historic times came into being. 

The discovery of the prehistoric civilization in Greece was 
one of the great surprises of exploration in the nineteenth 
century, and more recent excavations have only increased 
the wonder of modern critics at the stage of culture reached 
by the AXgean peoples. Their kings, who were probably also 
priests, lived in palaces, often of great extent, and these have 
preserved many fragments of elaborate wall-paintings and 
of vessels of gold, silver, bronze, stone, and clay. The most 
impressive example is the “Palace of Minos” excavated by 
Sir Arthur Evans at Cnossus in Crete. The graves of the 
dead have yielded many well-preserved specimens of weap- 
ons, utensils, and jewelry, which prove a high development 
of all the minor arts. 

Sculpture in the prehistoric age. Curiously enough, in 
spite of these many witnesses to the taste and skill of the 
prehistoric people, very little sculpture on a large scale has 

52 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 88 


‘been found on the A‘gean sites. In the famous circle of 
graves at Mycene, Schliemann discovered several sculptured 
tombstones, but the crude drawing and the flat relief with 

sharp edges show that these are the work of sculptors of 


FIG. 23—THE LION GATE. MYCENZ 


very slight ability. A more favorable impression is gained 
from the well-known Lion Relief over the principal gateway 
to the citadel of Mycene (Fig. 23). The pose of the lions 
is somewhat stiff, and the forelegs are badly attached to the 
bodies, but the modelling of the bodies themselves will bear 
comparison with all but the very best animal sculpture of 


54 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Egypt and Assyria; and when the heads, which were sep- 
arately carved and attached, were in place, the lions must 
have been impressive guardians of the portal. The date of 
this relief is probably about 1400 B.C. 

Sculpture on a_ small 
scale. The reliefs from My- 
cene are all that we have 
of large sculpture from the 
prehistoric age of Greece. 
But on a smaller scale, the 
artists of the gean period 
have left us many admir- 
able works, both in the 
round and in relief. The 
two ivory “Divers” from 
Cnossus,! which are more 
probably to be interpreted 
as acrobats turning somer- 
saults, are rightly praised 
for their vigorous action 
and exact details; and the 
figures of a Snake Goddess 
and her votary from the 
same site,? though less fine 
in detail, also show consid- 
erable skill in modelling. 
These are made of terra- 
cotta, with a vitreous glaze. 
But the finest example of a 
figure in the round that has 
yet been found is the gold 
FIG. 24—SNAKE GoppEss. museum and ivory Snake Goddess 

OF FINE ARTS, BOSTON acquired by the Museum 

of Fine Arts in Boston 

in 1914 (Fig. 24). It is said to have come from Crete, 
and both style and workmanship make such an _ origin 


*Cf. Annual of the British School in Athens, VIII, pls. 2 and 3. 
7 Annual of the British School in Athens, IX, p. 75, fig. 54; Evans, 
The Palace of Minos, pp. 500 ff. and Frontispiece. 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD dd 


practically certain, and date the figure about 1600 B.C. 
Although only 61% inches high, the statuette creates an im- 
pression of great dignity. The pose, with the shoulders 
thrown far back and the head proudly erect, is one that is 
found in other small figures and is common in the wall- 
paintings of the prehistoric age. The flounced skirt and the 
low-cut bodice, with a very small waist confined by a 
broad girdle, are also characteristic of the- female figures of 
this period. What most distinguishes the Boston figure from 
others, however, is the remarkably successful carving of the 
head. Even in the small scale in which he worked, the 
maker succeeded in giving to the face the same suggestion 
of dignity and pride of race that he attained in the pose. 
The individuality, too, in the shape of the nose and the 
slightly irregular mouth make one suspect that this is no 
creation of the artist’s fancy but a portrait of an individual. 
Such figures certainly suggest that the neglect of larger 
sculpture in the prehistoric age can hardly be attributed to 
lack of skill. Rather, we are forced to conclude that the 
beliefs and customs of the people prevented the creation of 
larger works, or at least, did not favor it. The reason is, 
perhaps, of no great importance. The fact is that sculpture 
on a large scale was hardly cultivated at all during the 
prehistoric period. 

The Dark Ages (about 1100-700 B.C.). The Aégean cul- 
ture came to an end about 1100 B.C., probably as a result of 
the struggles caused by the intrusion of new Greek tribes. 
There followed several centuries of confusion and upheaval, 
the history of which is still so obscure that the period is 
often called the Dark Ages. For the evolution of sculpture, 
this period is of no direct importance. What little evidence 
there is suggests that such sculpture as was produced con- 
sisted of crude images of wood, and these have all perished. 
But indirectly the Dark Ages exercised no little influence on 
the development of Greek art. In the struggle to gain posses- 
sion of the land, the Hellenic tribes experienced their first 
great, awakening, and entered upon that career of intelligent 
inquiry into the universe and its meaning which rapidly 
made them the intellectual leaders of the ancient world. The 


56 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Iliad and the Odyssey, which were, perhaps, based on events 
incident to the struggle for the land, were the first fruits of 
this awakening. In them, the characters of the gods were 
fixed for all later ages, a fact of great significance for the 
development of art; and one cannot but suspect that in many 
ways the national character was profoundly affected by con- 
tact with the earlier inhabitants and by the new environment. 

Physical conditions in Greece. To argue, as some writers 
have done, that the whole splendid development of literature 
and art in Greece was due primarily to the fact that the 
Greeks inhabited a country broken up into small districts by 
mountains and deeply indented by the sea is undoubtedly to 
exaggerate the importance of the physical environment. 
But it cannot be denied that these conditions exerted a 
powerful influence. The small districts favored the develop- 
ment of small city-states, and these fostered in their citizens 
a love of freedom and a sense of individual importance such 
as had been unknown to the inhabitants of the great mon- 
archies of the East. The sea furnished an easy means of 
communication among the separate states, with the islands 
of the AXgean, and with the colonies that were planted for 
purposes of trade in many places on the shores of the Med- 
iterranean and the Black Sea. The maritime trade thus es- 
tablished brought the Greeks into contact with other na- 
tions, from whom they learned many things, among them 
technical processes in the arts. Finally—a minor point— 
there can be no doubt that the general use of marble for archi- 
tecture and sculpture in Greece was largely due to the fact 
that the mountains of the mainland and the A®gean islands 
contain large and easily accessible deposits of this material. 

Political history. The political history of the Greeks was 
closely bound up with their physical environment. The em- 
phasis on the individual and the love of liberty which were 
fostered by the city-states led in almost all cases to some 
form of democratic government, in which every citizen had 
a share; and patriotism, which in the older monarchies had 
usually meant loyalty to the sovereign, came in Greece 
to mean loyalty to the state. It is true that the Greek 
view of liberty and of patriotism was a limited one. Only 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 57 


Greeks, to the Greek mind, were naturally entitled to lib- 
erty; all other races were barbaroi and might properly be 
enslaved. Greek patriotism was strictly local; it rarely rose 
to the conception of loyalty to a union of states. But, with 
these limitations, the Greeks were the first race in history 
to emphasize the importance of personal and civic liberty and 
to develop a high sense of patriotism. 

Religious beliefs. In Greek religion, the most striking 
features are the multiplicity of gods and heroes to whom 
worship was paid, and the fact that almost all these divine 
beings were conceived in human form, only more powerful 
and more beautiful than ordinary mortals. To represent 
these divinities, therefore, the sculptor had only to create 
the loveliest human forms he could imagine. Moreover, 
around these gods and heroes, the Greek imagination wove 
a mass of stories and myths so beautiful that they have be- 
come a part of the heritage of all later ages; and in these 
the sculptor found many subjects ready to his hand. Another 
important phase of Greek religion is the close association of 
athletic games with the worship of the gods. At the great 
festivals at Olympia, Delphi, Corinth, Nemea, and other 
places, the Greek sculptors enjoyed unrivalled opportunities 
for the study of the human figure; and the custom of erecting 
statues and groups to commemorate victories in the games 
brought them many commissions and powerfully affected the 
development of their art. 

Civic and religious character of Greek art. All these in- 
fluences combined to make Greek art essentially religious 
and civic in character. The noblest buildings in every Greek 
city, upon which architects, sculptors, and painters lavished 
all their resources, were the temples of the gods. But these 
temples were the offerings of the whole people, expressing 
their patriotic pride in the city of which they formed a part 
and their devotion to the gods who protected it. Next to the 
temples, the most important buildings, which also were often 
adorned with sculpture and painting, were the public offices, 
colonnades for the transaction of business, theatres, music 
halls, and other structures for public use. And for the pre- 
cincts of the gods and the squares and streets of the cities, 


58 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


sculptors were called upon to create many single figures, 
groups, and reliefs, both by the state and by private 
individuals. 

Importance of the indwidual artist. One result of the 
Greek emphasis on the individual was that the artists of 
Greece, unlike those of the oriental monarchies, usually 
signed their works, and that, in the later centuries of Greek 
civilization, a whole literature devoted to the history of art 
sprang up. We hear of books on the lives of individual 
artists, on the masterpieces of art, on proportion and similar 
subjects, very like the great literature of art in modern times. 
Although all these books have perished, excerpts from them 
are preserved in a number of later works, especially the great 
encyclopedia called the Naturalis Historia, written by Pliny 
the Elder in the first century after Christ. Next to Pliny, 
the most important ancient writer for the student of Greek 
sculpture is Pausanias, whose Description of Greece, written 
in the second century after Christ, is full of references to the 
works of the Greek masters. All these literary compositions 
are helpful in determining the authorship of statues that 
otherwise could not be assigned to their makers, and the his- 
tory of Greek sculpture gains enormously in interest from the 
personal note that the literary accounts supply. In Greece, 
for the first time in the history of sculpture, we meet with 
artists who stand out as individuals. 

Oriental influence. The first preserved monuments of 
sculpture that can properly be called Greek are not earlier 
than the last quarter of the seventh century. It was not 
until that time, apparently, that conditions became suffi- 
ciently settled in the Aigean area to bring about the produc- 
tion of large works in stone. The problem whether these 
earliest works were created under the influence of the olden 
arts of Egypt and Mesopotamia or were independent in 
origin has been much debated. Especially since the discovery 
of the monuments of the AXgean civilization, there has been a 
tendency to discredit the theory of ‘oriental influence” on the 
beginnings of Greek art. But the older theory cannot easily 
be rejected. The break between the prehistoric and the 
historic civilizations in Greece makes it highly -improb- 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 59 


able that much of the artistic tradition of the Aigean age 
survived; the seventh century was certainly a time of increas- 
ingly close relations between Greece and the East; and, 
most important of all, the earliest monuments themselves 
give evidence, as we shall see, of the influence of foreign 
models. It is no discredit to the Greeks that their develop- 
ment was inspired, in its beginnings, by the art of older 
nations. Their great merit is that they rapidly outgrew the 
formule of oriental art, and far surpassed their predecessors. 

Archaic Period (about 625-480 B.C.). The years from 
about 625 to the great Persian invasion of 480 are usually 
called the Archaic Period. This was a time of rapid intel- 
lectual development, when the problems of popular govern- 
ment were being threshed out. Many of the Greek states 
passed through the stage of “tyranny,” the rule of a single 
powerful man or family. Such “tyrannies,” in many cases, 
proved favorable to the development of art, since the tyrants 
tried to gain favor by beautifying the cities they controlled. 
At the same time, commercial relations expanded rapidly, 
producing the material prosperity that seems necessary to 
any great artistic development. In the field of literature, 
the period is marked by the beginnings of lyric and dramatic 
poetry, philosophy, and history. 

Early types. The earliest Greek statues that we possess, 
those made before the middle of the sixth century, fall into 
a few well-defined categories. Four types can be readily dis- 
tinguished: (1) the nude, standing male type, consisting of 
the figures commonly called “Apollos”; (2) the standing 
female type, regularly draped; (3) the draped seated type, 
in which there is little distinction between male and female 
figures; (4) the winged flying figure. To these some critics 
would add a fifth type, the nondescript draped standing 
figure. 

The Nicandra statue. Of the nondescript draped type the 
so-called Nicandra statue from Delos (Fig. 25) is an excellent 
example. This figure, identified by an inscription on the left 
side as an offering made to Artemis by a Naxian woman, 
Nicandra, is regarded by many as the earliest extant large 
Greek statue. Certainly it is one of the crudest. It probably 


60 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


represents Artemis, though it is possible that it was meant 
to be a portrait of Nicandra herself. In either case, the 
artist’s attempt to suggest a female figure can hardly be called 
successful. Entirely concealed under a heavy robe, the form 
might be that of a man. The sculptor’s lack of confidence in 
his ability to deal with his 
material is betrayed by the 
way in which he spread out 
the hair to afford support to 
the neck and hardly separated 
the arms from the sides. The 
form of the whole statue, also, 
which is very thin from front 
to back, shows how the maker 
was dominated by his mate- 
rial, a thin slab of the marble 
of Naxos. The few similar 
figures that have been found 
all seem to represent. goddesses 
or women, so that they may 
be regarded as early ex- 
amples of the standing female 
type. 

Standing draped _ female 
type. Most female figures, 
even of the early part of the 
archaic period, exhibit an 
advance over the Nicandra 
statue. The Hera of Samos 
byes (Fig. 26) may serve as an ex- 
eta sina erect ae Oy ample. The identification is 
ATHENS here fairly certain; an inscrip- 

tion below the right hand 
states that the statue was dedicated by a man, Cheramyes, to 
Hera. The inscription also dates the figure about 550 B.C. 
The curious cylindrical form of the lower part is perhaps due to 
the copying of an older figure hewn out of a tree-trunk; but the 
careful modelling of the toes and the upper body, and, above 
all, the raising of the left hand to the breast, show a distinct 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 


61 


advance in the representation of nature. In the drapery, too, 
although the use of parallel grooves to indicate the folds is 
very formal, the artist succeeded fairly well in differentiating 


the light chaton, or undergar- 
ment, from the heavier peplos, 
or cloak. The work is still far 
from perfect, but it is not ab- 
solutely primitive. 

The “Apollos.” The largest 
class of early archaic figures 
consists of the so-called “‘Apol- 
los.” The name, which was 
given to some of the first fig- 
ures of this sort to be found, 
has been retained as a con- 
venient label for the whole 
group of early nude male 
standing figures, though it is 
recognized that the same form 
was used to represent other 
gods and also human beings. 
Such “Apollos” have been dis- 
covered at many places, both 
on the mainland and in the 
islands, and are usually dis- 
tinguished by the names of the 
finding places. The well-pre- 
served Apollo of Melos in the 
National Museum at Athens 
(Fig. 27) is an excellent ex- 
ample. The members of the 


FIG. 26—HERA OF SAMOS. 


LOUVRE, 


PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 


eroup have certain common 


features—stiffly “frontal” position, with the left foot ad- 
vanced, arms held tightly at the sides and rarely detached 
from the body completely, hair falling in a mass to the 
shoulders and treated as a row of snail-shell curls or in other 
pattern-like arrangements over the forehead, eyes never 
sufficiently sunk under the brows and often very prominent 
and bulging, ears badly modelled and usually placed too high. 
Most marked of all, in the majority of the figures, the 


62 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


corners of the mouth are drawn up into the meaningless 
“archaic smile,’ which probably is only an attempt on 
the part of the makers to get some expression into their 
puppet-like creations. This feature is common to most early 
archaic statues, but it is in- 
teresting that one series of 
“Apollos” from  Beeotia 
shows an absolutely differ- 
ent type of mouth with 
straight and bulging lips, 
producing what is known as 
the “Bceotian pout,” and 
that there are, occasionally, 
other variations in the 
treatment of the lips, re- 
vealing, even in the primi- 
tive period, some study of 
the problem of facial ex- 
pression. 

The “Apollos,” more 
clearly than any other 
group of early archaic fig- 
ures, raise the question of 
oriental influence. There 
certainly are decided re- 
semblances between them 
and the Egyptian type of 
standing male figure (ef. 
Figs. 1 and 3). The fact, 
especially, that the left 
FIG. 27—APOLLO or MELos. NatTionaL [foot, rather than the right, 

MUSEUM, ATHENS is regularly advanced in 

both cases, furnishes a 

strong argument. It seems highly probable, therefore, that the 
makers of the earliest Apollos drew their inspiration from 
Egyptian models. At the same time, it is noteworthy that 
the Greek figures are entirely without the supporting slab 
which the Egyptian sculptor usually found necessary for 
stone statues, and that they are entirely without drapery and 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 63 


show from the first the endeavor to render the anatomy with 
greater accuracy, thus foreshadowing the later development. 

Draped seated type. The third group of archaic figures— 
the draped seated type—is most satisfactorily illustrated by 
a series of examples from the sanctuary of Apollo at Bran- 
chide near Miletus. These were discovered by the English 


FIG. 28—STATUE OF CHARES, FROM BRANCHIDZ. BRITISH MUSEUM, 
LONDON. (PHOTO. MANSELL) 


explorer Newton, and the best of them are now in the British 
Museum. The figure that is identified as Chares by an in- 
scription on the chair will give an idea of their character. 
(Fig. 28). The heavy, fleshy form is almost completely hid- 
den under the thick robes. It has well been said that the 
Chares “looks as if he could not get up without taking the 
chair with him.” Clearly, the sculptor did not succeed at all 
in differentiating the man from his seat or from his clothing. 


64 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Examples of the type which were evidently meant to repre- 
sent women show practically the same forms, and this is the 
justification for the name “nondescript seated draped type.” 
It has sometimes been thought that Assyrian influence should 
be seen in these heavily draped figures, but in this case the 
oriental influence, though 
probable in itself, certainly 
cannot be proved. 

The winged flying type. 
Most striking of all the 
types that were evolved 
during the early archaic 
period is the winged flying 
figure. Of this a remark- 
able example was found by 
the French explorers of De- 
los in 1877 (ig, 2975 oat 
is badly mutilated, but with 
the help of small figures in 
bronze which reproduce the 
same type, its original ap- 
pearance can be restored 
with practical certainty. 
Near the fragments of the 
statue, there was discovered 
a damaged base, on which 
the statue was probably set 


FIG. 29—vicrorY of DELOs. NATIONAL UP, and which contains 
MUSEUM, ATHENS. (PHOTO. ALINARI) the names of the sculptors, 


Mikkiades and Archermus 
of Chios. We have literary records of the activity of these 
sculptors in the first half of the sixth century, as well as a 
statement that Archermus was the first sculptor to represent 
Nike (Victory) with wings. It is tempting, therefore, to see 
in this figure the first example of the winged Victory which 
plays so great a part in the later art of Greece. Even if it is 
not absolutely the first, it shows well the difficulties which 
the early sculptors met with in their attempts to suggest 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 65 


motion. The upper body of the figure from Delos preserves 
an absolutely “frontal” position, the lower part is in profile, 
so that there is a twist of ninety degrees at the waist. The 
head displays all the peculiarities that we noticed in the 


heads of the Apollos. Yet 
the attempt to render such 
a difficult subject shows the 
initiative of the Greek 
genius. If the idea, as 
seems probable, was drawn 
from oriental sources—the 
winged human type sug- 
gests the winged deities of 
Mesopotamia—it must be 
said that the Greek artist 
worked it out in an original 
and hitherto untried man- 
ner. None of the oriental 
models which might have 
inspired the figure from 
Delos suggest motion so 
successfully. It is, there- 
fore, one of the best ex- 
amples of the Greek ability 
to transform the creations 
of the older civilizations so 
as to express Greek ideas. 

The Calfbearer. Not all 
the statues of the early ar- 
chaic time conform abso- 
lutely to one of the four 
types. There are many in- 
teresting variants. Only 
one can be mentioned here 
—the so-called Calfbearer 
from the Athenian Acropo- 


FIG. 30—THE CALFBEARER. ACROPOLIS 
MUSEUM, ATHENS. (PHOTO. BOIS- 
SON NAS) 


lis (Fig. 30). In this an Athenian artist has changed an 
Apollo into the figure of an offerrant, carrying on his shoulders 
the young bull which he has brought for sacrifice to Athena. 


66 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Early reliefs. Metopes from Selinus. Relief sculpture, as 
well as sculpture in the round, was undertaken by the artists 
of the earliest period, and these reliefs, as the first examples of 
work in a field in which the Greeks were destined to achieve 


FIG. 31—PERSEUS AND MEDUSA. MUSEUM, PALERMO. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


some of their greatest triumphs, are not without interest. 
Among the best preserved are three metopes which were re- 
covered in 1822 from the ruins of an early sixth century 
temple at Selinus in Sicily (called Temple C). The one 
that we have chosen as an example shows Perseus cutting 
off the head of the Gorgon in the presence of Athena (Fig. 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 67 


31). The figures are in very high relief, but there is no uni- 
form background, a method of carving that is found in many 
primitive reliefs. The squat, heavy figures are posed with 
heads and shoulders in front view and legs in profile, in much 
the same way as the contorted figures of Egyptian reliefs. 
The mask-like face of the Gorgon simply reproduces the type 
that was current for this monster, but the heads of Perseus 
and Athena show the prominent eyes and large, badly placed 
ears that we have noted in archaic statues in the round. In 
details, as in the extremely short right arm of Perseus and 
the left leg of the Gorgon, the artist’s difficulties in adapting 
his design to the space at his disposal are very evident. Some 
of these deficiencies, no doubt, were partially concealed by 
color, traces of which are still preserved. 

“Poros” reliefs from Athens. Other interesting reliefs from 
the early part of the sixth century have been found on the 


FIG. 32—“TYPHON.” ACROPOLIS MUSEUM, ATHENS 


Acropolis at Athens. They are often called the “poros” 
reliefs, from the material, a rather soft limestone, which the 
ancients called poros. Most of them originally formed parts 
of the decoration of buildings destroyed when the Persians 
sacked the Acropolis in 480 B.C. As they were exposed 
to the weather for a comparatively short time, they still 
retain much of the paint with which they were covered, 
and furnish the best evidence we have for the use of color 
on early Greek works of sculpture. The largest and most 
interesting is the so-called “Typhon” relief, representing a 
triple-bodied monster, with wings and a snaky tail, cut in 
very high relief (Fig. 32). It originally filled one half of 
the pediment of an early building, of which the other half is 


68 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


probably ‘preserved in a relief of similar dimensions repre- 
senting Heracles wrestling with the Old Man of the Sea. The 
human heads and bodies exhibit all the characteristic traits 
of early archaic sculpture, especially the carving of the eye in 
full face when the head is in profile, a detail that persists 
through the whole archaic period. But the most significant 
feature is the color. -This is almost completely unnaturalistic. 
The human bodies were painted red, with blue hair and 
beard; the coils of the serpents were striped with red, blue, 
and black. Color, in fact, was used simply for decoration, 
to bring out parts of the figures more clearly, and also, no 
doubt, to cover deficiencies in the soft stone. 

Ionic and Doric art. These few examples may serve to 
give some idea of the earliest Greek works of sculpture. They 
reveal an art in its infancy, but already giving promise of 
better things, and it is clear that during the first half of 
the sixth century, sculpture was eagerly cultivated in many 
different regions. of the Greek world. With the help of literary 
accounts, it 1s possible to distinguish several “schools” or 
groups of sculptors, and to draw some distinctions between 
them. Here we must be content with one or two broad dis- 
tinetions. .In general, the artists of the Ionic region, that 
is; the coast of. Asia Minor and the islands of the Aégean, 
appear to have. devoted themselves especially to the female 
‘figure; they’ were.concerned with the rendering of drapery, 
rather than with the study of anatomy, and the figures in 
Ionian art tend to appear fleshy and heavy under their thick 
garments. In the Dorian schools of the Peloponnesus and the 
west, on the other hand, the opposite principle prevailed. 
There it was the nude male figure, rather than the draped 
female, that especially interested the sculptors. The figures 
of Dorian sculpture are often squat and heavy, but the 
heaviness is due to overemphasis on the muscles, rather than 
to neglect of bodily forms. The Attic school, with its liking 
for strange monsters and emphasis on heavy muscles, seems 
neither exactly Ionic nor Doric, but appears like an independ- 
ent development. 

Later Archaic Period (about 550-480 B.C.). With the 
late archaic period, or, as it is often called, the period of 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD _ 69 


advanced archaism, these distinctions between Ionic and 
Doric sculpture become clearer. This was a time of rapid 
advance, marked by more extensive and more difficult under- 
takings on the part of the sculptors, as well as by much 
greater skill in carrying them out. 


FIG. 833—FACADE OF THE TREASURY OF THE SIPHNIANS, RESTORED. 
MUSEUM, DELPHI. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 


Ionic sculpture. The Treasury of the Siphnians at Delphi. 
As an example of Ionic sculpture, we may take the Treasury 
of the Siphnians at Delphi (sometimes incorrectly called the 
Treasury of the Cnidians). Of this building, which was 


70 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


erected about 520 B.C., so many remains were found by the 
French excavators of Apollo’s great sanctuary that they were 
able to undertake a reconstruction of the facade in plaster 
(Fig. 33). Details in the reconstruction are open to criti- 
cism, but it undoubtedly gives a good general idea of the 
appearance of the building and its elaborate decoration. 
What first catches the eye is the use of female figures in 
place of columns in the portico—the first known instance 
in Greece of the use of such forms as architectural supports. 
Though unsuccessful architecturally, they are excellent ex- 
amples of Ionic female figures of the later archaic type. 
Many features of early archaic work still persist, such 
as the prominent eyes and smiling mouths, but in most 
respects we note a great advance. The hair is carved in 
formal waves over the foreheads, and the locks which fall in 
front of the shoulders are carefully grooved to suggest the 
separate strands. Most noticeable of all is the improve- 
ment in the drapery. The folds of the garments are much 
more naturally rendered than in earlier work, with elab- 
orate “swallow-tail” effects at the edges. Though still stiff 
and formal, they show increasing ability to suggest the long, 
sweeping lines of the Greek dress; and the painstaking care 
with which they are worked out is characteristic of later 
archaic sculpture, and especially of the Ionic schools. 

The pediment. The triangular pediment was filled with a 
representation of the struggle between Heracles and Apollo 
for the Delphic tripod. This is interesting, technically, as 
a sort of transitional stage between early pediments in relief, 
like the Typhon pediment at Athens (Fig. 32), and later com- 
positions with figures in the round (cf. Figs. 35, 44, and 53). 
Here the lower parts of the figures are in relief, the upper 
parts are completely cut out, but very flatly worked. As a 
pedimental composition, the design is primitive. The sub- 
ordinate figures are smaller than those at the centre, and the 
movement, which is from left to right throughout the whole, 
fails to emphasize the central figures by means of converging 
lines. But it is clear that the comparatively small space at 
his disposal—the whole pediment is less than nineteen feet 
long—greatly hampered the designer. 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 71 


The friezes. By far the most successful parts of the decora- 
tion are the four friezes that adorned the four sides. Two 
are almost completely preserved: one, which represents a 
contest between Greeks and Trojans led by Menelaus and 
Hector, with an assembly of gods as spectators, has been 
used to fill the frieze in the reconstruction; the other, with a 
battle of gods and giants, occupied one of the longer sides 
(Fig. 34). The advance over earlier reliefs is very marked. 
The groups of fighting gods and giants are freely posed and 
skilfully carved. The exuberant liveliness of the Ionic 
Imagination comes out in many figures, especially in He- 


FIG. 34—BATTLE OF GODS AND GIANTS. MUSEUM, DELPHI. (PHOTO. 
GIRAUDON ) 


phestus (at the left hand end of the frieze), who works a 
great pair of bellows as he forges weapons for the gods, and in 
one of the lions of Cybele’s chariot, which seizes a giant and 
bites him in the thigh. The Ionic interest in drapery and 
skill in rendering it in formal folds are everywhere apparent. 
At the same time, details are often incorrect, and show that 
the sculptor is not yet free from the trammels of archaism. 
The figures, though actively posed, are often stiff and angu- 
lar; heads are rarely in any but the profile position, and some- 
times are turned completely about on the shoulders; eyes 
are still in front view when the head is in profile; and the 
attempt to suggest the powerful muscles of the contestants 


72 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


results in rather flabby forms, which show little knowledge 
of anatomy. Yet, in spite of these defects, the frieze suc- 
ceeds remarkably well. in conveying the impression of a 
mighty combat, and as it stood originally, with many de- 
tails made clearer by color, it must have formed a brilliant 
addition to the delicate Ionic architecture. 

Dorian sculpture. The Schools of Argos, Sicyon, and 
Aigina. In regard to Dorian sculpture in the later archaic 
period, considerable information is preserved in literature. 
Important schools are recorded in three places especially: 
Argos, Sicyon, and AXgina. For each of these the literary 
records, supplemented by inscriptions, make it possible to 
draw up lists of sculptors, but in every case, one man seems 
to have overshadowed the rest to such an extent that he may 
properly be called the head of the school. At Argos, the 
leading position was held by Agelaidas; at Sicyon, by 
Canachus; at Avgina, by Onatas. The recorded works of 
these men and of their associates show the tendencies of 
Dorian art at this time. They consist very largely of statues 
of gods and athletes, so that the Dorian schools have often 
been called “the schools of athletic sculpture.” 

The Agina marbles. The Dorian masters worked almost 
exclusively in bronze, and most of their productions have 
perished, but we are fortunate enough to have one fairly large 
group of works by which we can test the inferences drawn 
from the literary records—the so-called AXgina marbles. 
These were found in 1811 in the ruins of a temple on the 
island of Avgina, sold to the Crown Prince of Bavaria, re- 
stored in Rome by the sculptor Thorvaldsen, and then set up 
in the Glyptothek, or Museum of Sculpture, at Munich. 
More careful exploration of the ruins of the temple in 1901 
resulted in the discovery of many more fragments, and proved 
that the edifice was dedicated to a local goddess named 
Aphaia. Unfortunately, no direct evidence for the date of 
the temple has been recovered, but on grounds of style a date 
between 500 and 480, the very end of the archaic period, 
seems probable. 

The majority of the figures come from the two pediments. 
Fifteen were put together by Thorvaldsen, of which five are 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 7 


from the eastern pediment, ten from the western. Many 
suggestions have been made in regard to the exact com- 
position of each pediment, none of which has met with uni- 
versal acceptance, but the schemes proposed by Furtwangler 
in 1904 at least. give a general idea of the arrangement (Fig. 
35). Each pediment was occupied by a scene of battle, and it 
is generally believed that the eastern pediment represented a 
contest of the earlier expedition against Troy, which was 
led by Heracles, and the western, a contest in the famous 
Trojan War. In both cases, Athena occupied the central 
position; she was probably thought of as the arbiter of the 
combats, invisible to the fighting warriors. In composition, 
the groups show a marked advance over earlier pediments 
(cf. Figs. 32 and 33). The figures are all of the same size, 


FIG. 35—-WEST PEDIMENT OF THE TEMPLE OF APHAIA AT AUGINA, RESTORED. 
(FROM FURTWANGLER, “GINA,” P. 206) 


and so designed as to fit into their places in the narrowing 
fields in a fairly natural way. Yet the groups as a whole 
suffer from too exact balance. Every figure on one side is 
almost exactly similar to a figure on the other.. The separate 
groups, too, are not bound together at all. The designer has 
greatly improved on his predecessors, but has failed to 
grasp the important principles that underlie all such decora- 
tive compositions, namely, that the skeleton of the design 
must not be too obvious, and that the separate groups should 
be linked in some way so that the eye may pass easily 
from one to another. 

Similarly, in the individual figures, although there are 
lingering archaisms, the advance is notable. It is evident 
that, for the master of the AZ/gina pediments, the law of fron- 
tality no longer holds. His warriors are freely posed, bending 


74. A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


to right or to left as their actions or their positions in the 
pediment demand. This breaking of the law of frontality is 
found in other figures of late archaic times, and is one of 
the most important evidences of increasing confidence on the 
part of the sculptors. The Agina marbles also show a 
knowledge of anatomy, or at least, of the appearance of the 
human body in different positions, which is far in advance 
of anything we have yet seen. Muscles and sinews are ren- 
dered with approximate correctness, though in a rather hard 
manner, giving little suggestion of the suppleness of the 


FIG. 836—FALLEN WARRIOR FROM GINA. GLYPTOTHEK, MUNICH. 
(PHOTO. BRUCKMANN) 


human model. In this, it is surely reasonable to see the 
influence of athletics and athletic figures, which has been 
emphasized as one of the qualities of the Peloponnesian 
schools. Archaic conventionality is most marked in the 
heads. In sharp contrast to the expressive bodies, the heads 
of the warriors reveal hardly a trace of the feelings inspired 
by the conflict. Details are treated with great care, especially 
the hair, which is usually represented in two braids, brought 
together and tied over the forehead, in a manner common in 
figures of athletes. But the eyes are still insufficiently sunk 
under the brows, so that they seem staring and expressionless. 
Most remarkable of all, the mouths, in almost all cases, wear 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 75 


the quite inappropriate ar- 
chaic smile. Only in one 
case, the figure of a wound- 
ed warrior from the eastern 
pediment (Fig. 36), which 
in other respects also is the 
most advanced of these 
sculptures, the curve of the 
lips is so modified by the 
shadow cast by the short 
moustache that the expres- 
sion seems a grimace of 
pain, rather than the mean- 
ingless smile. 

The Aégina marbles, then, 
serve excellently to show 
both the skill and the limi- 
tations of the Greek sculp- 
tors towards the end of the 
archaic period. They prove 
that by this time the prob- 
lem of expression in bodily 
forms was _ practically 
solved, although the forms 
employed were still too 
hard to be entirely natural, 
but the problem of facial 
expression was still far from 
solution. 

The Attic School. Works 
under Ionic influence. The 
most important school of 
all in the later archaic 
period was that of Athens. 
We have already noticed 
that in the early archaic 
time the Attic school ap- 


FIG. 37—DRAPED FEMALE FIGURE. ACROP- 
OLIS MUSEUM, ATHENS 


pears to have pursued an independent course. In the 
later archaic period, the sculptors of Athens were strongly 


76 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


influenced by the products of Ionian art. Proof of this 
is found especially in the interesting series of female fig- 
ures which are commonly called the Acropolis maidens 
(Fig. 37). These were found on the Acropolis at Athens 
between 1886 and 1890, and are the remains of statues offered 
to Athena before 480, damaged in that year when the Per- 
sians sacked the Acropolis, and piously buried when the 
Athenians returned to the city after the Persians were forever 
driven out of Greece. Most of them were probably set up 
between 540 and 510, during the tyranny of Pisistratus and 
his sons. The fact that several bases with the names of 
Ionic sculptors were found in the “Persian débris” makes 
it likely that some of these figures are actually the work 
of Ionians, but most of them were made by Athenian sculp- 
tors, strongly affected by foreign models. Evidences of Ionic 
influence are seen in the elaborate working of the folds of the 
robes, and in the high, egg-shaped heads, long, narrow eyes, 
and exaggerated smiles of many of the figures. In others, 
the squarer head-type, more or less triangular eyes, and 
somewhat more sober mouths recall the qualities of Attic 
works of the earlier period, such as the Calfbearer (cf. Fig. 
30). The use of Pentelic marble for some of the figures, also, 
although many are of Parian, points to an Attic origin. 
Fragments show that the extended hand, which has almost 
universally been broken off, contained a fruit or other object, 
so that the figures were probably intended to represent girls 
making a perpetual offering to Athena in her sacred precinct. 

The most important contribution that the Acropolis maid- 
ens have made to our knowledge, however, is that they give 
an excellent idea of the use of color on marble statues of the 
later archaic period. The system is quite different from that 
in vogue for the earlier work in poros. In these later statues, 
few surfaces are covered with a solid color. The hair, the 
small part of the chiton that shows on one shoulder, and the 
shoes usually are painted in this way. For the rest, poly- 
chromy was used only sparingly, the larger part of the statue 
being left in the color of the marble, or possibly toned to an 
ivory yellow. The colors are simple—red, black, blue, and 
green predominate—and the system did not aim at nat- 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 77 


uralism in all respects. In most of the figures, the hair was 
painted red, and red was also used for the iris of the eye. 
But the total effect is extremely pleasant, especially in the 
delicate patterns that are strewn over the garments and in 
the richly decorated borders. By such a system of poly- 
chromy, the beauty of the marble is not obscured, but en- 
hanced, and the Acropolis figures furnish the best possible 
refutation of the charge that the coloring of marble, as the 


FIG. 388—MAN MOUNTING A CHARIOT. ACROPOLIS MUSEUM, ATHENS 


Greeks practised it, was barbarous. In later times, as we 
shall see, the range of colors was enlarged, but the method 
of employing color to pick out details in marble statues and 
reliefs was apparently retained throughout the Greek period. 

Reliefs under Ionic influence. A number of monuments 
show that relief sculpture in Athens fell under the same 
strong Ionic influence as work in the round. The figure of 
a man mounting a chariot, from an extended composition of 
which other fragments are known, will illustrate the point 


78 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


(Fig. 38). The extremely careful carving of the hair and 
the robe, together with the comparative neglect of the anat- 
omy, are quite in the spirit of Ionic art. 

Attic works under Doric influence. In several of the most 
advanced statues from the Persian débris, a new tendency 
makes its appearance, a tendency towards a more sober 
treatment, accompanied by 
greater interest in anatom- 
ical details and greater skill 
in rendering them. This we 
may fairly attribute to 
Dorian influence, especially 
as several bases with signa- 
tures of Dorian sculptors 
were found. The new in- 
fluence is seen in some of 
the female figures and in 
several examples of the 
nude male standing type. 
The most interesting is a 
female figure which was 
dedicated by a certain Eu- 
thydikos (Fig. 39). The 
upper part of the statue and 
the lower part with the 
inscribed base have been 
put together from frag- 
ments, but the connecting 

middle portion is lost. The 
FIG. 89—STATUE DEDICATED BY EUTHY- differences | hepieen anne 
DIKOS. ACROPOLIS MUSEUM, ATHENS. 
(PHOTO. ALINARI) statue and the majority of 

the female figures are very 
great. In contrast to the fussy treatment of the drapery in 
the Ionicizing figures, there is here a series of very simple, flat 
folds; the marble is not tortured into snail-shell curls, but the 
hair is more simply and naturally carved in waves on either 
side of a central parting; the eyes, though still not quite suf- 
ficiently sunk, are provided with thick lids, which cast more 
shadow than the shallow lids of the earlier figures, and so 


GREEK SCULPTURE: ARCHAIC PERIOD 79 


produce a more natural effect; and the lips, far from curving 
upwards into a smile, actually curve downwards and give a 
pouting effect, so that one of the nicknames for the figure is 
La petite boudeuse, the “Little Pouter.” 

General character of archaic Greek sculpture. If from the 
most advanced products of the archaic period we look back 
to the statue dedicated by Nicandra (Fig. 25) and the earliest 
Apollos (Fig. 27), we gain a vivid impression of the rapid 
progress made by the Greek sculptors during the first century 
and a half of their activity. The first works seem little 
removed from barbarism, the latest give evidence of much 
accurate observation and skilful execution. It is in this 
steady advance towards more exact representation that the 
merit of the sculptors of the archaic time appears most 
clearly. The constant study of the human model to which 
their works bear witness pointed the way for their successors, 
and made possible the great achievements of the centuries 
that followed. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


The best general history of Greek sculpture, charmingly 
written and beautifully illustrated, is M. Collignon’s Histoire de 
la sculpture grecque, Paris, 2 vols., 1892-97. The equally elabo- 
rate work of J. Overbeck, Geschichte der griechischen. Plastik, 
Leipzig, 2 vols., 4th ed., 1893-94, is excellent for facts, but written 
in a dry style and poorly illustrated. E. A. Gardner’s Handbook 
of Greek Sculpture, London, 2d ed., 1915, gives an authoritative 
and fairly comprehensive treatment of the subject. KE. von 
Mach’s Greek Sculpture, its Spirit and Principles, Boston, 19138, 
emphasizes the exsthetic, rather than the historical, point of view. 
The same author’s Handbook of Greek and Roman Sculpture, 
Boston, 1905, contains brief descriptions and bibliographical data 
on the series of 500 half-tone reproductions of Greek and Roman 
sculpture issued by the Bureau of University Travel. R. B. Rich- 
ardson’s History of Greek Sculpture, New York, 1911, in spite 
of its compactness, records many interesting points of view. 

The passages from Greek and Roman writers that throw 
light on the history of Greek sculpture are collected in J. Over- 
beck’s Die antiken Schriftquellen zur Geschichte der bildenden 


80 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Kiinste bei den Griechen, Leipzig, 1868. The most important of 
these notices are published, with English translation and brief 
commentary, in H. 8. Jones’s Select Passages from Ancient 
Authors Illustrative of the History of Greek Sculpture, New 
York, 1895. The parts of Pliny’s Naturalis Historia of interest 
to the student of sculpture and painting are conveniently pub- 
lished in K. Jex-Blake and E. Sellers’s The Hilder Pliny’s Chap- 
ters on the History of Art, New York, 1897. The most useful 
edition of Pausanias is Sir J. G. Frazer’s Pausanias’s Description 
of Greece, New York, 6 vols., 2nd ed., 1913. 

The best introduction to the art of the bronze age in Greece 
is H. R. Hall’s Mgean Archeology, London, 1915, with a good 
bibliography. Among books that deal especially with archaic 
Greek sculpture are the eighth volume of Perrot and Chipiez’s 
Histoire, Paris, 1903; H. Lechat’s Au musée de Vacropole 
d’Athénes, Paris, 1908, and La sculpture attique avant Phidias, 
Paris, 1904; W. Lermann’s Altgriechische Plastik, Munich, 
1907; H. Schrader’s Archaische Marmorskulpturen im Akropolis- 
museum zu Athen, Vienna, 1909; and W. Deonna’s Les Apollons 
archaiques, Geneva, 1909. 


CHAPTER V 
GREEK SCULPTURE: THE FIFTH CENTURY 


Political history. The defeats inflicted on the Persian in- 
vaders in 480 and their final expulsion from Greece in 479 
exerted a powerful influence on the development of Greek art, 
an influence which was felt both directly and indirectly. The 
rebuilding of cities that had been sacked, like Athens, and 
the execution of the many thank offerings voted by the 
separate states for their deliverance made immediate de- 
mands upon architects, sculptors, and painters. Even more 
important was the impulse to creative effort that came from 
the repulse of the barbarians. The parallelism in this case 
between the development of sculpture and the development 
of literature is exact. The Persians of Aéschylus and the 
History of Herodotus were directly inspired by the Persian 
struggle; the inspiration of the other masterpieces of fifth 
century literature may fairly be traced indirectly to the 
uplift of spirit which resulted from the victories of the 
Greeks. During almost all of the fifth century, Athens was, 
both politically and artistically, the leading state in Greece. 
Of the statesmen under whose guidance she won and main- 
tained her leadership, the most important was Pericles, and 
the period of Athenian supremacy is often called the Age of 
Pericles. 

The School of Athens and the School of Argos. The great 
master of the Attic school of sculpture at this time was 
Phidias, to whom was entrusted the oversight of the grandiose 
scheme adopted by Pericles for beautifying the city. The 
plan included the erection of the four famous buildings of 
the Acropolis—the Parthenon, the Propylea, the Erech- 
theum, and the Temple of Wingless Victory—buildings which 
were universally admired throughout all antiquity, and which, 

81 


82 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


even in ruins, make Athens a place of pilgrimage today. The 
Athenian sculptors did not work for Athens alone, but exe- 
cuted commissions for other states and for the great shrines, 
such as Olympia and Delphi. Another prominent school 
during the fifth century was that of Argos. Its leader was 
Polyclitus, and works of its members, like those of the Athe- 
nians, were widely distributed throughout Greece. 

Distinction of periods. The change from archaism to 
absolute freedom was a gradual one; in fact, it was not until 
the middle of the fifth century that archaic mannerisms were 
wholly abandoned. The thirty years between 480 and 450, 
therefore, are often called the Transitional Period, the years 
between 450 and 400, the First Half of the Great Period. 

The Transitional Period (480-450 B.C.). The earlier 
works of both Phidias and Polyclitus were executed during 
the age of transition, but the literary notices that prove this 
give little information about the appearance of these statues 
and groups. But works of other sculptors are preserved in 
the original or in copies in sufficient numbers to show the 
character of transitional sculpture. 

“Roman copies.” In considering the works of the great 
masters, we frequently have to deal, not with the originals, 
which have been destroyed, but with copies made in later 
times. Sometimes these were executed in the same material 
and on the same scale as the originals, but often they were 
not. Bronze statues were often copied in marble; the scale 
of the work, in many cases, was reduced; statues in the round 
were frequently copied in relief, especially for the decoration 
of coins; vase-painters sometimes drew their inspiration from 
the creations of the sculptors; so that the student of sculpture 
often has to deal with evidence of many sorts in attempting 
to recover an ancient work. The most important group of 
copies, however, is made up of marble statues on a fairly 
large scale, and these are what are commonly meant when 
critics speak, without qualification, of copies of ancient stat- 
ues. Such copies, of course, might have been made at any 
time after the completion of the originals, but most of them, 
apparently, were made for Roman patrons after the Roman 
conquest of Greece in 146 B.C. For this reason, the name 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 83 


“Roman copies” is usually applied to them. They differ, 
naturally, in many respects from the originals. Not only 
were the copyists less able sculptors than the great masters, 
but it is clear that they often based one copy on another and 
sometimes intentionally introduced modifications, so that 
the result is a reflection, rather than a copy. Especially in 
making marble copies of bronze originals, the copyists were 
often obliged to introduce supports of various kinds, which 
sadly mar the total effect. 

“Restoration.” Moreover, until about a century ago, the 
mutilated ancient statues that were discovered were almost 
universally turned over to “restorers,” who supplied missing 
heads and arms and other parts. Sometimes such restorers 
were fortunate enough to recognize the original types, but 
more often they were obliged to interpret the fragments that 
were given to them as best they could, and “restoration” pro- 
duced’ many strange and confusing figures. In dealing with 
our preserved monuments, therefore, we have constantly to 
keep in mind that their evidence may have been confused in 
two quite different ways, first by faulty or careless copying 
in antiquity, and secondly by false restoration in modern 
times. 

Critius and Nesiotes. The Tyrannicides. All these diffi- 
culties can be well illustrated in the case of one of the most 
famous works of the transitional time, the group called the 
Tyrannicides. This represented, under somewhat idealized 
forms, the two Athenians, Harmodius and Aristogiton, whose 
attack upon the sons of Pisistratus in 514 B.C. was after- 
wards regarded as the primary cause of the overthrow of the 
tyranny and the establishment of democratic government in 
Athens. Immediately after the expulsion of Hippias in 510, 
a sculptor named Antenor was commissioned to make a 
group in bronze representing the Athenian heroes. This was 
duly set up in the market place, only to be carried off as 
part of the booty from Greece by the Persian invaders. 
When the Athenians returned in 479, one of their first acts 
was to place a commission for a new group of the Tyranni- 
cides with two sculptors named Critius and Nesiotes, and 
this was set up in the market place in 479 or 478 B.C. Later, 


84 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


after the conquest of Persia by Alexander the Great, the 
older group by Antenor was sent back to Athens either by the 
conqueror or one of his successors, and was placed beside the 
work of Critius and Nesiotes. 

Greek and Roman writers mention the Tyrannicides not 
infrequently, but seldom in such a way as to tell us much 
about the appearance of the two groups, or, indeed, to make 
it clear to which of the two they refer. There are copies and 
reflections on a small scale on Athenian coins and painted 
vases and in a mutilated relief on a marble chair, now in a 
private collection in Scotland. But the most important evi- 
dence is found in several mutilated Roman copies of the usual 
sort, that is, figures or parts of figures in marble, which were 
evidently meant to reproduce closely the size and the stylistic 
peculiarities of the originals. The most important of these 
are two figures in Naples (Fig. 40), which have been ar- 
ranged, following the evidence of the coins and the vases, 
with Harmodius on the spectator’s right and Aristogiton on 
his left. Both the figures have been considerably restored. 
In the Harmodius, the modern additions include both arms, 
almost all of the right leg, and the left leg from the knee 
down. In the Aristogiton, numerous small bits have been 
added, and the head, although ancient, is from a copy of 
some work of the fourth century. The awkward tree-stumps 
are due, as they commonly are, to the fact that the figures 
are marble copies of bronze originals. 

In spite of all these changes, the statues in Naples give us 
a fairly clear idea of one of the groups of the Tyrannicides. It 
is generally believed that this was the group by Critius and 
Nesiotes, rather than that by Antenor, since such free poses 
and accurate modelling can hardly be attributed to so early 
a date as 510. Besides, one of the female figures from the 
Acropolis is very surely a work of Antenor’s, and this shows 
a stiffness and formality of treatment very different from the 
freedom of the Naples group. Here, then, we see the quali- 
ties of Attic art just after the Persian wars. It is evident 
that in the bodies there is little of archaic formalism. They 
are easily posed, and the muscles are accurately rendered, 
though with a certain hardness. In the head of the Harmo- 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 85 


FIG. 40—HARMODIUS AND ARI 


TOGITON. MUSEU 


mM 


86 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


dius, however, many traits are reminiscent of archaic manner- 
isms. The hair consists of a mass of snail-shell curls all over 
the head; the eyes, though they have the thick lids which 


FIG. 41—BRONZE CHARIOTEER. MUSEUM, 
DELPHI 


are found in the latest 
statues from the Persian 
débris, are still not suffi- 
ciently sunk and produce a 
staring effect; and the 
mouth has no real expres- 
sion, though the archaic 
smile is quite gone. The 
persistence of archaic traits 
in the heads is one of the 
most marked features of 
transitional sculpture. 

The Charioteer of Delphi. 
It is pleasant. to turn from 
a work of which only copies 
are preserved to an original 
like the bronze charioteer 
found at Delphi in 1896 
(Fig. 41). This formed a 
part of a life-size group 
representing a four-horse 
chariot, such as were fre- 
quently set up to commem- 
orate victories in chariot 
races. A mutilated inscrip- 
tion shows that the group 
was dedicated in the seven- 
ties of the fifth century. 
With this date the style of 
the bronze agrees perfectly. 
The folds of the charioteer’s 
robe, though rather formal, 
are worked out with a free- 


dom and accuracy that suggest a posed model; but in the 
head, the flatly modelled hair, the abnormally sharp eye- 
brows, the prominent eyes, and the expressionless mouth 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 87 


are all suggestive of archaic times. Among the inter- 
esting details are the pastes and enamels used to form 
the eyes—the regular practice in Greek bronze statues— 
and the traces of silver inlay in the pattern on the fillet 
about the head. Evidently the Greeks aimed at polychrome 
effects even in bronze statues. Several details, such as 
the working out of the first growth of beard on the cheeks 
and the notching of the eyelids to suggest the eyelashes, 
show the advance towards accuracy that characterizes the 
transitional age. Above all, the freshness and vigor of 
the Charioteer make us realize how much we lose when we 
are forced to study copies of Greek masterpieces rather than 
originals. 

Calamis of Athens and Pythagoras of Rhegiwm. In spite 
of much debate, there is no general agreement as to the author 
of the Charioteer of Delphi. Among the sculptors whose 
names have been suggested are two who are shown by literary 
notices to have been among the most famous masters of the 
period—Calamis of Athens and Pythagoras of Rhegium. Of 
the two, Calamis, whose chariot groups and horses are 
especially mentioned, is, perhaps, the stronger claimant. But 
in this, as in many other cases where no work of the sculptor 
has been surely identified, certainty is quite impossible. Not- 
withstanding the researches of many skilful critics, Calamis 
and Pythagoras are still little more than names. 

Myron. Inthe case of Myron, we are in a more fortunate 
position. Two of his works, at least, have been identified in 
copies, and the literary accounts contribute some helpful in- 
formation. Born at Eleuthere in Boeotia, he was active in 
Athens, and so is accounted an Athenian sculptor. Of his 
works, the most famous was a Discobolus, or Discus-thrower, 
the popularity of which is attested by a number of copies. 
These differ in details, but by combining the best parts of 
several, the original can be reconstructed with practical 
certainty (Fig. 42). The fame of the statue rests largely on 
the skill with which action is suggested. The position is one 
of momentary rest, as the athlete gathers all his force for 
the final effort. Yet so skilfully is the pose chosen that 
it seems like one that could be held almost indefinitely. In 


88 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the modelling of the muscles, the best copy (that from Castel 
Porziano, now in the National Museum in Rome) shows a 
roundness and softness that are distinctly in advance of 
anything we have yet seen, but the regular locks of the hair, 


FIG. 42—DISCOBOLUS OF MYRON, RESTORED. NATIONAL MUSEUM, ROME. 
(FROM BRUNN-BRUCKMANN, “DENKMALER,” PL. 632) 


lying close to the skull, have something of the formality of 
archaic art. 

The second work of Myron’s that can be recovered is a 
group of Athena and Marsyas, which was on the: Acropolis 
at Athens. The moment chosen for representation was that in 
which the goddess, having practised playing the double flute 
and thrown it away in disgust, turns angrily on Marsyas, who 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 89 


gazes covetously towards the discarded instrument. Figure 
43 1s an attempt to reconstruct the group, based principally 
on a copy of the Athena in Frankfort on the Main and one 
of the Marsyas in the Lateran Museum in Rome. As a 
study of arrested motion, the Marsyas is a worthy rival of 
the Discobolus, and the tense muscles show the same under- 


FIG. 43—ATHENA AND MARSYAS OF MYRON, RESTORED. ARCH OLOGICAL 
MUSEUM, MUNICH. (FROM “ARCHAOLOGISCHE ANZEIGER,” 1908) 


standing of the appearance of the body in an unusual position. 
The simple, girlish figure of Athena forms a pleasing contrast 
to that of the Silenus, though the grouping, with one figure in 
front view and the other in profile, cannot be called success- 
ful. Both figures show an unusual attempt at facial ex- 
pression which helps to confirm the belief that Myron was 
the most original sculptor of his age and marked the last step 
in the transition from archaism to perfect freedom. 


90 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Sculptures from the Temple of Zeus at Olympia. The 
pediments. Among the original works of the transitional 
period which have been preserved, the largest group is the 
series of decorative sculptures from the temple of Zeus at 
Olympia, erected about 460 B.C. Both pediments of this 
temple were filled with large figures, about one and one-half 
times life-size, and parts of all of these were found by the 
Germans in their excavation of Olympia between 1875 and 
1881. With the help of Pausanias’s description, therefore, it 
is possible to restore the original appearance of the two com- 
positions with practical certainty (Fig. 44). The subject of 
the eastern pediment was “the chariot race of Pelops with 


FIG. 44—PEDIMENTAL GROUPS OF THE TEMPLE OF ZEUS AT OLYMPIA, RE- 
STORED. (FROM LUCKENBACH, “OLYMPIA UND DELPHI,” FIGS. 13 AND 14) 


(Enomaus about to begin.” The central figure was Zeus, as 
arbiter of the contest. On his right stood Pelops and Hippo- 
damia, on his left, @2nomaus and Sterope. Then followed, on 
each side, a chariot with attendants, and the figures in the 
angles represented the two rivers of Olympia, the Alpheus and 
the Cladeus. In the western pediment was the battle of the 
Centaurs and the Lapiths, with Apollo as the central figure. 

Composition and style. The comparison that suggests it- 
self at once is with the pedimental sculptures from gina, 
and such a comparison shows the progress that had been made 
in the thirty years or more which separate the two works. 
It is clear that the designer had not yet completely solved the 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY on 


problem of pedimental composition. Each of the Olympia 
pediments is made up of a series of balancing groups, so that 
the skeleton of the design is still too prominent. Yet inside 
the groups, there is considerable variety, and the balance is 
by no means so exact as in the pediments from A¥gina. Even 


FIG. 45—APOLLO FROM THE WESTERN PEDIMENT. MUSEUM, OLYMPIA 


more marked is the advance in the individual figures. The 
Olympia sculptures have little of archaic formalism (Fig. 
45). The modelling is often superficial and sometimes de- 
cidedly careless—faults which are partially explicable, per- 
haps, by the fact that they would hardly be noticed at a 
height of forty feet, in figures brilliant with color—but the 
main facts are correctly rendered. The drapery has lost all 


92 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


its “fussiness,” and falls in very simple folds. There is a 
notable attempt at expression in the faces of many figures. 
Only in the heads, where the hair still is represented by wavy 
grooves, where ears are sometimes misplaced, and where 
eyelids do not overlap at the outer corners, do we find 
reminiscences of the earlier mannerisms. The finest of these 
figures, the Apollo from the western pediment, which has 


FIG. 46—HERACLES, ATLAS, AND A HESPERID. MUSEUM, OLYMPIA 


rapidly become a favorite with lovers of Greek art, seems not 
unworthy of a great master. 

Authorship. The question of the makers of the Olympia 
pediments has been much debated. Pausanias says that the 
eastern pediment was the work of Pzonius of Mende, the 
western, of Aleamenes, a pupil of Phidias. But the one work 
of Peonius that we have (see p. 101) and the traditions about 
Alcamenes certainly do not tend to confirm Pausanias’s state- 
ment. The style of both pediments seems absolutely the 
same, and modern critics, in general, are inclined to think the 
tradition mistaken. The most likely suggestion is that the 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 93 


pediments are the work of local, that is, of Peloponnesian 
sculptors, considerably influenced by Ionic art. 

The metopes. Such a theory is confirmed, to a certain 
extent, by a study of the metopes from the temple of Zeus. 
Twelve of these were carved in high relief, with the twelve 
labors of Heracles. One of the best preserved (Fig. 46) 
shows Heracles supporting the heavens, while Atlas holds out 
before him the apples of the Hesperides and one of the daugh- 
ters of Hesperus tries to assist him. The simple, direct 
modelling is quite in the spirit of the pedimental sculptures. 
So, too, are the attempt at expression in the faces and the 
blocking out of the hair of Heracles and Atlas, for which the 
details were no doubt supplied by the painter. As evidence 
of the progress made in the transitional period, the carving 
of the eye no longer in front view, but almost correctly fore- 
shortened, is noteworthy. 

The Ludovist Throne and the Boston Relief. Even finer 
than the metopes from Olympia as examples of transitional 
work in relief are the two marbles most commonly called the 
Ludovisi Throne and the Boston Relief (Fig. 47). Each of 
these consists of a heavy block of marble, hollowed out at 
the back and decorated on the three outer sides with low 
reliefs. The designation of one as a “throne” is due to 
this peculiar form, but it is much more probable that both 
served as parapets at the two ends of a long, rectangular 
altar. The larger compositions represent in one case, the 
birth of Aphrodite from the sea, in the other, the contest of 
Aphrodite and Persephone for the beautiful Adonis, with 
Eros holding the scales. The single figures on the sides are 
most plausibly interpreted as worshippers of Aphrodite, and 
the altar was, presumably, dedicated to the goddess of love. 
In these reliefs, the crisp and delicate handling of the marble, 
the wide variety in the corresponding figures, and the many 
touches which give evidence of close study of nature almost 
make us forget the lingering archaisms. They have the 
charm so often found in works that just precede the period 
of perfect freedom. 

The Great Period: First Half (450-400 B.C.). By the 
middle of the fifth century, the Greek sculptors had definitely 


(I “Id ‘TIGL .{SLQLILSNI NAHOSIOOIOYHOUY NAHOSLAGA HOIIWASIVY Sad HONAYHVS,, WOU) ‘NOLSOd ‘SLUV ANIA 
Jo WOGSAW GNV ‘WOU “WOAASAW IVNOILYN “(MOTU@) JIITAY NOLSOM AHL GNV (SAOMV) ,ANOUHL ISIAOGNI,, THI—JPF ‘dl 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 95 


abandoned the archaic formule, and the years from 450 to 
400 B.C. witnessed the creation of many of the works most 
admired by later generations. The most famous masters of 
this time were Polyclitus of Argos and Phidias of Athens, and 
since both these sculptors 
began their careers before 
the middle of the century, 
it is fair to argue that the 
advance from archaism to 
perfect freedom was largely 
due to them. 

Polychitus. Of the life of 
Polyclitus we have little in- 
formation, except that he 
was born early in the fifth 
century, was a pupil of 
Agelaidas, was working as 
late as 420, and in his 
maturity was the recog- 
nized head of the Argive 
school. In regard to his 
ideals and tendencies, how- 
ever, the ancient writers 
have preserved a number of 
interesting notices. From 
their statements it appears 
that he was a theorist and a 
scholar, much interested in 
the problem of ideal pro- 
portions for the human fig- 
ure. This appears espe- 
cially in a statement that 
he published a book on  jyyg, 48—rHe porYPHORUS. NATIONAL 
proportion, which he called MUSEUM, NAPLES 
“The Canon,” that is, “The 
Rule,” and then illustrated his principles by making a statue 
which he also called “the Canon.” Among his works, many 
statues of athletes are mentioned, and his favorite material 
was clearly bronze. All this suggests that Polyclitus was a 


96 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


sculptor who carried on in the great age the traditions of the 
old Argive school of athletic sculpture. 

Although we have no original from the hand of Polyclitus, 
three of his works can be recognized in copies: the Dory- 
phorus, or Spearbearer; the Diadumenus, or Man tying on 
a Fillet; and an Amazon. The very complete copy of the 
Doryphorus found at Pompeii in 1797 (Fig. 48) shows well 
the important features of the Polyclitan ideal—the pose with 
one foot set back and touching the ground only with the toes 
(often called the “walking motif” of Polyclitus) ; the powerful, 
stocky figure, with muscles modelled in large masses and with 
strongly defined boundaries; the squarish head, with hair 
in regular locks lying close to the skull; and rather prominent, 
slightly open lips. The whole suggests physical rather than 
mental power. The name Doryphorus is a descriptive title, 
such as were often given to statues in later days, and there is 
some evidence that the Doryphorus was really the Canon, 
the statue made to illustrate Polyclitus’s rules of proportion. 
In any case, the very similar qualities in the Diadumenus 
and the Amazon prove that it represents the Polyclitan ideal. 
The ancient writers lay emphasis on the wonderful finish of 
Polyclitus’s bronzes, a feature which the marble copies can- 
not reproduce, and consistently praise his gold and ivory 
statue of Hera at the Hereum near Argos, of which only 
the most distant reflections in coins have survived. If only 
an original had been preserved, we should probably form a 
much more favorable impression of the sculptor than we can 
from the marble copies. On the basis of what we have, the 
criticism preserved by the Roman Varro, that ‘Polyclitus’s 
statues are squarish and almost of a pattern” seems fully 
justified. Nevertheless, the influence of the Argive sculptor 
was very great. This is shown not only by the long list of his 
pupils, but also by the large number of statues and heads 
with Polyclitan traits that have been preserved. Some of 
these, no doubt, go back to works of the master himself, while 
others are based on the productions of his pupils and 
imitators. | 

Phidias. The testimony of the ancients is practically unan- 
imous in appraising Phidias as the greatest sculptor of the 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 97 


fifth century. But their statements in regard to his life 
are so few and so contradictory that long controversies have 
been waged as to his exact date and the sequence of his 
works. He must have been born early in the fifth century, 
and probably was active as late as 430, perhaps even later. 
The one certain date in his career is the year 438, when his 
colossal gold and ivory Athena in the Parthenon was dedi- 
cated. Shortly after this, he was involved in litigation at 
Athens, and it was probably at this time that he was in- 
vited to Olympia and there created the great gold and ivory 
Zeus which became the most famous of his works. But it is 
possible that the Zeus was made before the Athena, between 
456 and 448 B.C. Among his other works, a bronze Athena 
on the Acropolis, called the Lemnian Athena, was probably 
made between 451 and 447, when an Athenian colony was 
sent to Lemnos, and the colossal bronze Athena Promachos, 
also on the Acropolis, was presumably erected well before the 
middle of the century, since it is said to have been constructed 
from Persian spoil. The same statement is made about sev- 
eral other works of the master, and is the basis for the belief 
that his career began fairly early in the fifth century. 

When we turn from literature to the monuments, we find 
ourselves in an even worse position than in the case of Poly- 
clitus. Only two works of Phidias have been surely recog- 
nized in copies—the Athena Parthenos and the Olympian 
Zeus—and the copies are all on a small scale and, for the 
most part, of inferior workmanship. The most complete copy 
of the Athena, the Varvakeion statuette (so named from the 
place where it was found in Athens), doubtless reproduces ac- 
curately the pose and some of the attributes, such as the 
shield with the serpent coiled inside it, the triple-crested hel- 
met, and the Victory on the right hand (Fig. 49). But it isa 
heavy, mechanical piece of work, and, since most of the color 
is lost, gives nothing of the brilliant polychrome effect of the 
original, in which, in accordance with the regular practice 
in such chryselephantine statues, the flesh parts were of ivory, 
the drapery and accessories of gold, and precious and semi- 
precious stones were used to some extent. Several parts of 
the decoration, also, which are known from literary accounts, 


98 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


are omitted in the Varvakeion statuette, especially the reliefs 
which decorated the base, the shield, and even the edges of 
the sandals. On the original, which was some forty feet 


FIG. 49—THE VARVAKEION ATHENA. NATIONAL MUSEUM, ATHENS 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 99 


high, these’ reliefs could be modelled at a good scale and 
must have added much to the brilliant effect of the whole. 
The Olympian Zeus was an even more elaborate figure 
than the Athena Parthenos. Its height was roughly the same, 
about forty feet, but as it was a seated figure, the scale was 
even larger. Most of our knowledge of the statue is derived 
from the very full description of Pausanias. The god held 
a Victory on his right hand; 
his left rested on a sceptre, 
on which was perched an 
eagle. The throne and a 
footstool under the feet 
were elaborately decorated 
with reliefs and figures in 
the round, and there were 
reliefs on the base as well. 
Between the legs of the 
throne were wooden panels, 
painted with mythological 
subjects by Panenus, the 
nephew and assistant of 
Phidias. Once more we 
suspect that much of the 
fame of the figure was due 
to these elaborate decora- 
tions. But the ancient writ- 
ers comment especially on 
the impression of dignity yy¢. 50—HEap or ZEUS. MUSEUM OF 
and power, tempered by FINE ARTS, BOSTON 
kindness, which Phidias 
imparted to the statue. Among the reflections of the 
Olympian Zeus, the most important are found on coins of 
Elis. On some of these the whole statue is reproduced, on 
others the head only. They confirm Pausanias’s statements, 
but naturally omit many details. The copies of the head, 
however, make it possible to identify some reflections of the 
Zeus among ancient heads that have been preserved. The 
closest reflection yet discovered is a head in Boston (Fig. 50), 
itself a work of the fourth century. It seems as if the later 


100 ACHISTORY. OF SCULPTURE 


sculptor had overemphasized the kindly expression of the 
original, at the expense of the expression of dignity and 
power, but in all other ways the Boston head agrees closely 
with the coin types. 


’ FIG. 51—VICTORY BY PONIUS. MUSEUM, OLYMPIA 


These reflections of Phidias’s greatest statues give us some 
impression of the dignity and grandeur of his figures of the 
gods, but exhibit few of those personal idiosyncrasies by 
which the style of one sculptor is distinguished from that of 
another. The influence of Phidias, therefore, is less easy to 
trace than that of the other great Greek sculptors. Yet there 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 101 


can be no doubt that this influence was very great. Almost 
all his works that are mentioned were statues of divinities, 
and especially of the great divinities of the Greek Olympus, 
and it is clear that these profoundly affected the conceptions 
of later times.. The fame of Phidias rests primarily on his 
success in expressing the lofty ideals of his contemporaries in 
regard to their highest gods, ideals which were modified by 
later men, but never completely abandoned. 

Lesser sculptors of the fifth century.. Peonius of Mende. 
Of the less famous masters of the second half of the fifth 
century, there are very few whose works have yet. been recog- 
nized. Psonius of Mende is shown by his statue of Victory 
(Fig. 51) to have been a sculptor of great originality. The 
goddess was represented actually flying through the air. 
Even in its mutilated condition, 
the statue conveys a vivid 1m- 
pression of rapid motion, with 
its windswept drapery and the 
flying eagle underneath the 
feet. This impression must 
have been even more vivid 
when the figure stood on its 
lofty pedestal, with upraised 
wings and a great. robe bellying 
out behind. The whole exhibits 
so much greater freedom than 
the figures from the eastern 
pediment of the temple of Zeus 
that the tradition which as- 
signs the pediment to Pzeonius 
(see p. 92) seems incredible. 

Cresilas of Cydon. Although 
he was a native of Cydon ae | 
in Crete, Cresilas appears to 7 ot fe eet apie 
have worked largely in Athens. (puHoro. MANSELL) 

Among his works was a por- 

trait of Pericles, of which five copies are known (Fig. 52). 
This is interesting from many points of view. It gives us 
some idea of the manner of Cresilas and of the appear- 


102 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


ance of the great Athenian statesman. Most interesting of 
all is the obvious idealization. We can hardly believe that 
the face of Pericles was so unwrinkled, the features so regular 
as they appear in the work of the sculptor. Nothing, indeed, 
shows the idealizing tendencies of Attic art in the Periclean 
age more clearly than such elimination of personal traits 
in a portrait. 

Other sculptors of the fifth century. The majority of the 
other sculptors of the fifth century who are mentioned by an- 
cient writers still remain, in spite of much ingenious theoriz- 
ing, little more than names. The list includes: Agoracritus of 
Paros, Aleamenes of Athens, and Colotes of Heraclea in Elis, 
pupils of Phidias; Praxias, pupil of Calamis; Lycius, son of 
Myron; Styppax of Cyprus and Strongylion of Athens, whose 
school connections are not recorded. 

The sculptures of the Parthenon. Although the Parthenon, 
like the other Periclean buildings at Athens, was erected 
under the supervision of Phidias, it is nowhere stated that he 
made the decorative sculptures, and indeed the amount of 
these is so great that no one man could have carved them all 
in the fifteen years (447-432 B.C.) durmg which the temple 
was erected. It seems highly probable, nevertheless, that the 
scheme of the decoration would be laid out by Phidias and 
that. he would himself design at least a considerable part of 
it. However this may be, whether or not we may regard the 
Parthenon sculptures as reflecting the personal style of 
Phidias, they are original works of the Attic school of the 
fifth century, and so of the very greatest importance. The 
amount of sculpture on the Parthenon shows the builders’ 
intention to make this the most splendid of Greek temples. 
Not only were both pediments filled with large figures in 
the round, but all the ninety-two metopes were carved in 
high relief, and around the main structure, at the top of the 
wall, ran a continuous frieze in low relief, over 520 feet in 
length. Considerable portions of all this decoration are pre- 
served on the temple itself, but the greater part is in the 
British Museum, among the so-called “Elgin marbles,” a great 
collection made in Athens by agents of Lord Elgin early in the 
nineteenth century, and purchased by the British Museum in 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 103 


1816. There are small pieces, also, in other European 
museums. . 

The pediments. The eastern pediment represented the 
birth of Athena; the western, the contest between Athena and 


FIG. 53—THE WESTERN PEDIMENT OF THE PARTHENON, RESTORED. (FROM 
SCHWERZEK, “ERLAUTERUNGEN ZU DER RECONSTRUCTION DES WESTGIEBELS 
DES PARTHENON”) 


Poseidon for the land of Attica. The composition cannot be 
determined in all details, but the main lines are clear. The 
western pediment, especially, can be restored with some cer- 
tainty (Fig. 53), thanks to sketches made by an artist who 


FIG. 54—“THREE FATES” FROM THE EASTERN PEDIMENT OF THE PARTHENON. 
BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON. (PHOTO. MANSELL) 


visited Athens in the train of M. de Nointel in 1674, thirteen 
years before an explosion of gunpowder destroyed a large 
part of the temple. Here, clearly, the designer has grasped the 
principle that the skeleton of a decorative composition should 
be concealed. The groups balance on either side of the centre, 


104 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


but inside the groups the arrangement varies widely, so that 
the spectator is not conscious of the underlying plan. Such 
“occult balance,” as it is sometimes called, is very character- 
istic of Greek design during the great age. 

Of the preserved figures, the finest are the three from the 
eastern pediment which are generally, but probably incor- 
rectly, called the Three Fates (Fig. 54). In these we see 
plainly the idealizing tendencies of fifth century art. “They 
look as if they were modelled on human bodies,” said the 


FIG. 55—METOPE FROM THE PARTHENON. BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON. 
(PHOTO. MANSELL) 


sculptor Dannecker, when he first saw the Elgin marbles, 
“but where is one to find such bodies?” ‘This is undoubtedly 
the impression that the sculptor wished to convey, of beings 
in human form, but without the imperfections of humanity, 
beings perfect in health and strength. Even the drapery is 
idealized, and shows only long, sweeping, graceful lines, fol- 
lowing the poses of the figures. 

The metopes. The metopes of the eastern and the western 
facades of the temple are still in place, but they are very 
badly mutilated. The subjects are the battle of the Gods 
and the Giants (eastern end) and the battle of the Greeks 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 105 


and the Amazons (western end). A few of the northern 
metopes are also still on the building, but even the theme 
of these (perhaps scenes from the sack of Troy) is doubtful. 
Our knowledge of this portion of the sculpture, therefore, 
depends almost entirely on the eighteen metopes with con- 
tests of Centaurs and Lapiths that have survived from the 
southern series. Most of these are among the Elgin marbles 
in the British Museum. They are curiously uneven in style. 
In several the design is somewhat awkward and angular, 
the modelling hard, with details suggestive of the lingering 
archaism of transitional art. All this implies that the metopes 
were the first parts of the decoration to be carved. The 
style is precisely what one might expect in the work of 
pupils of Myron, Critius, and Nesiotes, before they were 
trained by Phidias (Fig. 55). Only a very few of the pre- 
served metopes are entirely free from such reminiscences of 
earlier work. 

The frieze. The continuous frieze, on the other hand, is 
carved with perfect freedom. ‘There is some unevenness in the 
execution of different parts of the long composition, but these 
are clearly due to more or less’ careful. workmanship, not 
to archaic constraint. The subject is the Panathenaic pro- 
cession, the gorgeous pageant which every four years moved 
through the city to the Acropolis, escorting the victors in 
the Panathenaic games, bringing animals for a sacrifice to 
Athena, and carrying the peplos, or robe, woven: for the 
goddess by a chosen company of Athenian girls. The way 
in which the subject is treated is very characteristic of the 
time. There is no attempt at photographic accuracy, but the 
frieze consists of a series of groups suggested by the partici- 
pants in the actual procession, skilfully arranged to produce 
a varied and beautiful effect. The sculptor did not hesitate 
to depart from the actual whenever it suited his purpose. 
The peplos is not represented at all, and it is quite evident 
that the intention was to create an ideal picture of the cere- 
mony as an epitome of all that was noblest and best in Athens 
(Fig. 56). Equally striking are the technical details. Since the 
frieze was under the colonnade, it had to be seen at a sharp 
angle and could receive light only from below. The relief, 


106 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


therefore, was kept very low; it nowhere rises more than two 
and one-quarter inches from the background, and the average 
height is only an inch and a half, although this amount was 
somewhat increased by the many attachments of metal, for 
which the drill holes still exist. It is noticeable, too, that the 
relief is generally higher at the top than at the bottom. Yet, 
with this low relief, the designer did not hesitate to suggest 


FIG. 56—HORSEMEN FROM THE NORTH FRIEZE OF THE PARTHENON. BRITISH 
MUSEUM, LONDON. (PHOTO. MANSELL) 


several figures one behind the other. The purpose was accom- 
plished by a clever system of sloping planes, so arranged that 
some part of almost every figure was brought out to the face 
of the relief. The result is an impression of depth which is 
remarkable in such low relief. Another interesting detail is 
the observance of the principle called isocephaly, or tsocephal- 
asm, in accordance with which the heads of all figures are 
brought close to the top of the relief, so as to cover the back- 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY _ 107 


ground and avoid unpleasant vacant spaces. In consequence, 
there is a marked disproportion between the horsemen and 
the standing and seated figures, but the isocephalism is so 
skilfully managed that the spectator is usually unaware of it 


it until it is pointed out. 
The underlying principle is 
again the idealism, the will- 
ingness to depart from ex- 
act natural relations to pro- 
duce a desired effect, which 
is so pronounced in the 
sculpture of the great age. 
Other Attic temples. The 
Erechtheum. Of the other 
buildings erected in Athens 
during the age of Pericles, 
all except the Propylea 
were decorated with sculp- 
ture. From the Erechtheum, 
numerous fragments of a 
long frieze with many fig- 
ures in low relief are pre- 
served, but so badly muti- 
lated that not even the sub- 
ject can be made out. The 
most curious peculiarity of 
this frieze is that the fig- 
ures were carved separately 
in white marble and at- 
tached to slabs of dark 
“Hleusinian” stone. Much 
more impressive are the six 
female figures which carry 
the roof of the so-called 
Caryatid porch. Five of 


FIG. 57 —CARYATID FROM THE ERECH- 
THEUM. BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON. 
(PHOTO. MANSELL) 


these, considerably repaired, are still in place; the sixth is 
among the Elgin marbles (Fig. 57), and is represented on 
the temple by a cast. In the inscriptions that record the 
building of the Erechtheum, these figures are not called 


108 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Caryatides, put simply “maidens,’ and they were prob- 
ably thought of as Athenian girls in the service of Athena, 
to whom, along with Erechtheus, the temple was dedicated. 
With their sturdy forms and simply arranged robes, they 
seem entirely adequate for the task of holding the weight 
that rests upon them, and the Caryatid porch is generally 
regarded as the most successful attempt ever made to use 
human figures as architectural supports. One significant 
detail is the arrangement of the hair as a mass, with 
separate locks falling over the shoulders in front, a device 
which recalls the archaic formula, and which was adopted, 
no doubt, to afford better support at the weakest point in 
each figure. It is interesting, too, that the figures are not 
mechanical reproductions of a single model, but each one 
differs in small details from every other. 

The Temple of Wingless Victory and the “Theseum.” The 
so-called Temple of Wingless Victory, dedicated to the wor- 
ship of Athena as bringer of victory and officially called the 
Temple of Athena Nike, had a continuous frieze of small 
figures in high relief, representing a battle of Greeks and 
Persians (perhaps the battle of Platea) in the presence of 
an assembly of the gods. On the so-called Theseum in the 
lower city, built in the thirties of the fifth century, eighteen 
metopes are decorated with exploits of Heracles and Theseus, 
and at the ends of the main building are continuous friezes, 
that at the eastern end representing a battle in the presence 
of seated gods, that at the western, the contest of the Cen- 
taurs and the Lapiths. In both these temples, the style of 
the reliefs differs considerably from that of the Parthenon 
frieze. There is a marked fondness for figures in violent and 
contorted positions, the modelling is harder, the principle of 
isocephalism is often disregarded. All this suggests the work 
of men more strongly influenced by the older Attic 
masters like Myron, Critius, and Nesiotes than by Phidias, 
and these sculptures are sometimes referred to as productions 
of “the non-Phidian group of Attic sculptors.” 

The balustrade of Athena Nike. Of the tendencies of 
Athenian sculpture at the end of the fifth century, we have 
interesting evidence in the fragments of the balustrade or 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY — 109 


parapet of the temple of Athena Nike. The temple stands 
on the great tower which finishes off the southern wall of the 
Acropolis at its western end, and was built so close to the 
edge of the tower that some protection for visitors was felt 
to be necessary. To fur- 
nish this, a parapet of mar- 
ble, some three feet high, 
was erected, and decorated 
on the outside with reliefs 
representing winged Vic- 
tories engaged in various 
occupations, such as bring- 
ing cows for sacrifice and 
erecting trophies. Athena 
appears to have been repre- 
sented on each of the three 
sides of the parapet, and 
the Victories were no doubt 
conceived as honoring the 
ereat goddess. Of the num- 
erous fragments of the bal- 
ustrade that have been 
found, the favorite is one 
which shows a Victory ty- 
ing her sandal (Fig. 58). 
The skilful rendering of the 
gracefully poised figure and 
the treatment of the thin, 
clinging robes so as to show 
the form beneath make this 

; FIG. 58—VICTORY TYING HER SANDAL. 
one of the masterpieces of acroporis MUSEUM, ATHENS. (PHOTO. 
Greek sculpture. Histor-  Borssonnas) 
ically these qualities are in- 
teresting because they foreshadow the development of the 
sculptor’s art in the next century. 

Decorative sculpture under Attic influence. The influence 
of the Attic school of the fifth century is found in works 
from many widely separated places. The most important are: 
the well-preserved frieze from the temple of Apollo Epi- 


¢ 


110 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


curius at Basse near Phigalia in Arcadia, now in the British 
Museum; the sculpture from the ‘“Nereid Monument” at 
Xanthus in Lycia, also in the British Museum; and the long 
series of reliefs from the so-called Herodn of Gjélbaschi- 
Trysa in Lycia, now in Vienna. In all these, single figures 
and groups, and sometimes whole compositions, were clearly 
inspired by the decoration of the great Athenian buildings of 
the Periclean age. 

General character of fifth century sculpture. Throughout 
the fifth century, the Greek sculptors devoted themselves pri- 
marily to the human figure. Details of landscape and forms 
of animals were seldom introduced in their work unless they 
were necessary in connection with the human figures. The 
favorite subjects were the gods and the heroes and the myths 
concerning them, although athletes and other mortals 
were frequently represented. The transitional age witnessed 
a rapid progress towards more accurate modelling, and by 
the middle of the century, the sculptors were able to work 
out their ideas with perfect freedom. In the fifty years that 
followed, they endeavored to express the highest beauty that 
they could conceive, and the idealizing tendency is the most 
prominent characteristic of the sculpture of the period. In 
creating these ideal figures, the sculptors omitted many of the 
details that appear in an actual model, and the effect of super- 
human beauty that the works of the fifth century produce 
is largely due to this “principle of elimination.” With rare 
exceptions, the poses chosen were comparatively quiet, and 
even in the representation of active figures, the pose was 
such as to suggest the possibility of more energetic action, a 
characteristic that is sometimes referred to as the “rule 
of reserve force.” It is noteworthy, too, that the faces of 
the figures rarely express any strong emotion. The expres- 
sion is usually one of calm serenity, and this impassivity, 
combined with the quiet pose, produces the impression of 
- dignity and perfect poise which was evidently the ideal of 
the sculptors. 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FIFTH CENTURY 111 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


An interesting and suggestive account of the sculpture of the 
Transitional Period, with constant reference to developments in 
other fields, is A. Joubin’s La sculpture grecque entre les guerres 
meédiques et Vépoque de Peériclés, Paris, 1901. HH. Lechat’s 
Phidias et la sculpture grecque au v® siécle, Paris, 1906, is a 
similar treatment of the following period. KE. A. Gardner’s Six 
(rreek Sculptors, New York, 1910, contains chapters on Myron, 
Phidias, and Polyclitus, as well as on the great masters of the 
fourth century. A. Furtwangler’s Meisterwerke der griechischen 
Plastik, Leipzig, 1893 (published in English under the title Mas- 
terpreces of Greek Sculpture, London, 1895) attempts, largely on 
stylistic grounds, to increase the body of work assigned to the 
famous Greek masters; many of Furtwangler’s theories have not 
met with general acceptance, but the book is full of valuable 
suggestions. Semi-popular accounts of the two great masters of 
the Periclean age are M. Collignon’s Phidias, Paris, 1886, and 
P. Paris’s Polycléte, Paris, 1895. ©. Waldstein’s Hssays on the 
Art of Pheidias, New York, 1885, is characterized by keen obser- 
vation and illuminating criticism. A. Mahler’s Polyklet und 
seine Schule, Leipzig, 1902, discusses the large number of pre- 
served works in which the influence of the Argive master is 
evident. 

The Parthenon and its decorative sculpture have a whole litera- 
ture of their own. The most comprehensive work, although now 
out-of-date in many particulars, is A. Michaelis’s Der Parthenon, 
Leipzig, 1871. M. Collignon’s Le Parthénon, Paris, 1910, is a 
sumptuously printed volume, with many unusual illustrations. 
Similar in character is A. H. Smith’s The Sculptures of the 
Parthenon, London, 1910. A. S. Murray’s The Sculptures of the 
Parthenon, New York, 1903, is more modest in make-up, but 
excellent in matter, based on an intimate knowledge of the 
originals. For less detailed accounts of the great monuments 
of Athens, reference may be made to E. A. Gardner’s Ancient 
Athens, New York, 1902; M. L. D’Ooge’s The Acropolis of 
Athens, New York, 1908; and C. H. Weller’s Athens and its 
Monuments, New York, 1913. 


CHAPTER VI 
GREEK SCULPTURE: THE FOURTH CENTURY 


The art of the fourth century developed directly out of 
that of the fifth, and no sharp dividing line can be drawn 
between them. Nevertheless, there are considerable differ- 
ences between the products of the two periods, so that the 
years from 400 to the death of Alexander the Great in 323 
B.C. are commonly distinguished as the Second Half of the 
Great Period. 

Political history. The political power of Athens was 
greatly impaired by the Peloponnesian War, and the early 
years of the fourth century witnessed the so-called Spartan 
and Theban “supremacies” (404-371 and 371-362 B.C.). 
From 359 on, most of the Greek states were involved in the 
intrigues of Philip of Macedon, whose control over Greek 
affairs was finally established by the battle of Cheeronea in 
338. The Macedonian domination continued under Alex- 
ander, who succeeded his father in 336 and soon after began 
the victorious campaigns in Asia by which Greek culture was 
extended over a large part of the ancient world. 

The School of Athens and the School of Sicyon. The 
direct effects of these political changes are not especially 
marked. Throughout the second half of the great age, 
Athens remained the artistic leader of Greece, and the 
“Younger Attic School” of the fourth century, of which the 
most important member was the famous Praxiteles, pro- 
duced many works that rivalled those by the older group of 
masters in fame. The school of Argos was supplanted by 
the school of Sicyon, under the lead of Lysippus. A third 
great master of the period was Scopas, who appears to have 
been a wandering artist, not closely connected with any 
school. 

112 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FOURTH CENTURY 113 


Influences of new conditions. The indirect effects of the 
unsettled conditions of the fourth century were much more 
important than the direct results. Most of the city-states 
were impoverished by the Peloponnesian War and _ the 
struggles that followed, so that they could not enter upon 
great public undertakings such as characterized the fifth 
century. At the same time, there was a decided increase of 
luxury in private life, and sculptors were more and more 
called upon to execute commissions for private citizens. The 
consequence was an increasing individualism, both in the 
sculptors and in their works, and a striving for grace and 
delicacy, rather than for the austerity and grandeur which 
were the ideals of the older sculptors. The new tendencies 
found expression in several ways, especially in slenderer pro- 
portions, in more detailed modelling, and in the use of thinner 
drapery, carved in rippling folds. The expression of emotion, 
also, greatly interested the men of the fourth century, and 
much of the more individual effect of fourth century figures is 
due to the sculptors’ successful attempts to suggest the feel- 
ings or the character of their subjects. The general result is 
that the creations of the fourth century, though still much 
idealized, are more suggestive of human beings than the 
severer figures of the preceding age. ‘The phrase, “the 
humanization of the gods,” expresses well one marked feature 
of the development during this period. 

Praxiteles. Of the three great masters of the period, 
Praxiteles is the most famous. He is, moreover, the one 
whose style is most surely determinable, and so may reason- 
ably be considered first. He was born early in the fourth 
century, and his greatest activity seems to have fallen be- 
tween the years 370 and 340. His fame is attested by the 
fact that no less than forty-seven of his works are mentioned 
by ancient writers. To modern students he is especially 
interesting as the one very famous sculptor from whose hand 
an original work has been preserved. This is the Hermes 
with the young Dionysus at Olympia (Fig. 59), which, since 
its discovery in 1877, has served as the basis of all study of 
Praxiteles. Hermes is here represented as he carries the 
baby Dionysus to the Nymphs, by whom, according to tra- 


FIG. 5J—THE HERMES OF PRAXITELES. MUSEUM, OLYMPIA 
114 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FOURTH CENTURY 115 


dition, he was brought up. He has thrown his cloak over 
a tree-stump, upon which he leans. His right arm was raised 
and held some object, probably a bunch of grapes, towards 
which the child stretched out his left hand. Many of the 
traits of fourth century sculpture can here be seen: the 
slender figure (though there is no lack of strength); the 
modelling in comparatively small surfaces, which pass into 
one another by very gradual transitions and lack the strong 
definition of fifth century work; 
the expressiveness of the face, 
with its slightly smiling mouth. 
Among the specifically Praxite- 
lean traits may be noted the pose 
with one hip strongly thrown out, 
producing what is sometimes 
called the “S-curve of Praxite- 
les”; the high skull, with its 
strongly curved outline and dis- 
tinct taper towards the chin; the 
long, narrow eyes, with the lower 
hd slightly drawn up and made 
very thin, to produce an effect of 
dreamy contemplation; the rend- 
ering of the hair by a series of 
deep, irregular grooves. But it 
is above all in the marvellous 
surface finish that the skill of 
the master is most manifest— 
in the smooth working of the 
marble to suggest the flesh, the 
rougher surface of the hair, the 
clever suggestion of the folds of Fc. 60—apHRopITE oF CNIDUS. 
the robe. With this figure before Ao pee na 
us, we realize once more how _ 1887, py. 80; From A cast) 
much we lose in being forced to 
study the styles of the great masters in the inferior Roman 
copies. 

After the Hermes, such other works of Praxiteles as can 
be recognized in copies are bound to be disappointing, al- 


116 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


though some of them reproduce statues which in antiquity 
enjoyed much greater fame. This is especially true of the 
Aphrodite of Cnidus, the master’s most renowned work. The 
mediocre copies, of which the best is in the Vatican 
(Fig. 60), give an idea of the pose and the general appearance 
of the figure, but lack the masterly technique of the Hermes. 
The nudity of the goddess is a striking innovation and one 
that was destined to exercise a powerful influence on later 
men. Up to this time, undraped female figures, like the 
flute-player on the “Ludovisi throne” (Fig. 47), were rarely 
represented by Greek sculptors. It was apparently Prax- 
iteles who first made such types popular, and it is to be noted 
that he treats them with a restraint that is characteristic of 
the great age. The lack of self-consciousness in the Aphro- 
dite of Cnidus is one of the traits that most distinguish it 
from the imitations and modifications of the type in later 
times. 

Scarcely less famous than the Aphrodite among the works 
of Praxiteles were an Eros and a Satyr. The Eros has not 
yet been distinguished with certainty among several types of 
the god of Love which suggest a Praxitelean original, but 
the Satyr is very surely to be recognized in a type repre- 
sented by a large number of copies, the best known of which 
is the so-called Marble Faun in Rome (Fig. 61). The spirit 
of Praxiteles speaks in every feature of the statue, the leaning 
pose, with its graceful, smuous outline, the smiling mouth, 
the long, narrow eyes. One can imagine how the sculptor 
would delight in differentiating the texture of the panther 
skin from that of the flesh. The semi-bestial character of 
the satyrs, which is emphasized in most ancient renderings 
of these followers of Dionysus, is only hinted at here by the 
pointed ears and the slightly slanting eyes. 

One other statue by Praxiteles can be surely recognized 
in copies, the Apollo Sauroctonus, or Apollo slaying the 
Lizard. This represents a very youthful Apollo, hardly more 
than a boy, leaning against a tree-stump and attempting to 
strike a lizard, which is moving towards him. The figure is 
interesting as one of the best examples of the humanization 
of the gods and also as one of the few works of Praxiteles 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FOURTH CENTURY 117 


that are said to have been made of bronze. There are, 
further, in Athens, three slabs from Mantinea, which origi- 
nally decorated the base of a group by Praxiteles representing 


Leto and her children. On 
these is carved the contest 
of Apollo with Marsyas in 
the presence of the Muses. 
We can hardly believe that 
decorative reliefs of this 
sort were carved by the 
master himself. But they 
might have been made from 
his designs by assistants, 
and the Muses may be 
taken as evidence for the 
type of draped female fig- 
ure current in the school of 
Praxiteles. It is, as might 
be expected, of somewhat 
slenderer proportions than 
the draped figures of the 
fifth century, with the robes 
in very delicate and grace- 
ful folds. 

From these works alone 
we might draw the infer- 
ence that Praxiteles was 
most interested in the rep- 
resentation of youthful dei- 
ties, of figures in which the 
grace and the joy of life 
could best be expressed, and 
such an inference is fully 
justified by the literary no- 
tices of works that have not 
been preserved. Among 


FIG. 61—THE “MARBLE FAUN.” CAPI- 
TOLINE MUSEUM, ROME 


these, few statues of the older gods are mentioned and few 
purely human figures. The literary accounts also show 
that he was a sculptor in marble, rather than in bronze; 


118 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


they emphasize his great technical dexterity, a quality to 
which the Hermes bears eloquent witness; and one writer 
remarks that Praxiteles attained great skill in “expressing 
in marble the feelings of the soul,” indicating that to ancient, 
as to modern, critics, the expressiveness of Praxitelean 
statues was one of their prominent features. 

Scopas. Scopas was, apparently, a somewhat older con- 
temporary of Praxiteles. Since he is called a Parian, he was 
probably born in the Ionian island of Paros, but he was a 
wandering artist, not closely afhliated with any school. In 


FIG. 62—HEADS FROM THE TEMPLE OF ATHENA ALEA AT TEGEA. NATIONAL 
MUSEUM, ATHENS. (FROM “ANTIKE DENKMALER,” 1, PL. 35; FROM CASTS) 


the early years of the fourth century, he was at work in the 
Peloponnesus; around 350, he was engaged with other sculp- 
tors in decorating the Mausoleum at Halicarnassus in Asia 
Minor; but of the details of his life we have no information. 
Our knowledge of his style depends on several badly muti- 
lated heads from the temple of Athena Alea at Tegea, of 
which he is said to have been the architect (Fig. 62). These 
heads, clearly, are the work of a sculptor of very differ- 
ent ideals from Praxiteles. Their most prominent trait is 
the expression of strong feeling, as if they came from figures 
under stress of violent emotion. This effect is produced 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FOURTH CENTURY 119 


especially by the eyes, which are round and wide open, with 
upward directed gaze and strongly emphasized lids, deeply 
sunk under the brows and overshadowed at the outer corners 
by a heavy roll of flesh. It was further suggested by the 
open mouths, showing the teeth, and by the dilated nostrils, 
which, when the heads were uninjured, must have given an 
impression of heavy breathing. The total effect is often char- 
acterized as “intensity of expression.” In shape the heads 
are squarish, and suggest 
the influence of the Poly- 
clitan canon. 

In spite of the decidedly 
individual style of the 
heads from Tegea, few of 
the other works of Scopas 
mentioned by ancient writ- 
ers have been identified. A 
much mutilated statuette in 
Dresden is probably a copy 
of his Baechante, which 
once stood in Constantino- 
ple and was famous as 
a successful embodiment of 
a frenzied worshipper of 
Dionysus. <A Heracles in 
Lansdowne House, Lon- 
don, may be derived from 
Scopas’s Heracles at Sicyon. 
An Apollo Cithareedus in FIG. 63—MELEAGER. FOGG MUSEUM. 
the Vatican and the Ludo- CAMBRIDGE 
visi Ares in the National 
Museum in Rome are with some reason regarded as reflections 
of Scopasian works, considerably affected by the taste of later 
times. Among the statues attributed to Scopas on grounds of 
style alone, one of the most interesting is a figure of Meleager, 
the leader in the famous Calydonian boar-hunt. The most 
complete copies are in the Vatican and the Berlin Museum; 
the one that exhibits the closest similarities to the heads from 
Tegea is in Cambridge, Massachusetts (Fig. 63). The more 


120 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


complete copies show that the pose resembled that of the 
Doryphorus, with the weight on the right leg and the left 
foot touching the ground with the toes only. But the ten- 
dencies of the fourth century are evident in the more ac- 
centuated curve of the body and in the modelling in smaller 
masses. In the head, the round, wide-open eyes, with the 
roll of flesh over the outer corners, the open mouth, and the 
broad nostrils, show clearly the Scopasian striving for the 
expression of strong feeling. 

In Scopas, then, we have a master who may well be called 
the foil to Praxiteles. To Scopas the storm and stress of 
life appealed more strongly than its more joyous aspects, 
and we find in his creations a violence of feeling far removed 
from the graceful elegance of the Praxitelean types. In later 
times, the influence of Scopas was fully as great as that of 
his more famous contemporary. 

Lysippus. Lysippus was the most prominent Pelopon- 
nesian sculptor of the fourth century, the leader of the school 
of Sicyon. His date is determined by his close connection 
with Alexander the Great (b. 356—d. 323), of whom he is 
said to have made many portraits, beginning with one of 
Alexander as a boy. There is evidence, moreover, that he 
was active before 356 and after 323, so that his career must 
have covered a large part of the fourth century. In the 
literary tradition, Lysippus is frequently mentioned, largely, 
perhaps, because one of his pupils wrote treatises on sculp- 
ture and painting that were much used by later writers. 
Among the innovations attributed to Lysippus is the intro- 
duction of a new canon of proportions, with a smaller head 
and a slimmer, less heavy body. He is praised for his render- 
ing of the hair and for “extreme delicacy of execution, even 
in the smallest details.” All his works, apparently, were in 
bronze, and ranged from small figures like the Heracles Epi- 
trapezius which is said to have adorned the table of Alexander 
to colossi like the Zeus of Tarentum, sixty feet in height. His 
energy is suggested by the story that he was accustomed to 
put one coin from every honorarium he received into a 
money-box, and when this was opened by his heir, it was 
found to contain 1500 coins. 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FOURTH CENTURY 121 


Under such conditions, we should expect to find among 
preserved works many copies, at least, of Lysippic statues. 
It is little less than astounding that there is not a single 
figure that can be regarded as an accurate copy of one of 
his works. There are plenty of statues that show Lysippic in- 
fluence in their slender proportions and in heads about. one- 
eighth of the total height, in contrast to the one-to-seven 
proportion of the Polyclitan canon, but there is none that 
can surely be called an accurate copy of a known work of 
the master. The two figures that have been most discussed 
in this connection are the Apoxyomenus in the Vatican (Fig. 
64) and the portrait of the athlete Agias at Delphi (Fig. 65). 
The Apoxyomenus, as the name implies, represents an athlete 
scraping himself with the strigil, or curved scraper, which the 
Greeks used to remove oil and dust from the body after exer- 
cise. The slender proportions, the close-lying muscles, the 
small head, and the freely modelled hair are all qualities that 
are recorded as especially Lysippic; and since Pliny men- 
tions an Apoxyomenus by the master which was greatly ad- 
mired, the figure in the Vatican has often been regarded as a 
copy of that statue. A careful study of the Roman figure, 
however, shows in the anatomical details a scientific ac- 
curacy which certainly is not common in works of the fourth 
century, and in recent years the theory has gained ground 
that, although it probably is based on the Apoxyomenus of 
Lysippus, the copyist worked his figure out in accordance 
with the more realistic style of later times. 

Such a theory is strengthened by a study of the Agias, 
which is one of a group of statues found at Delphi in 1897. 
The group was dedicated by Daochus, a Thessalian tyrant 
of Pharsalus, and inscriptions found long before in Phar- 
salus show that a similar group was set up there and that in 
this group the Agias, at least, was made by Lysippus. It 
seems reasonable, therefore, to argue that the statue at 
Delphi is a copy of the corresponding figure at Pharsalus, 
which presumably was of bronze. If this is so, we have in 
the Agias a fourth century copy of a Lysippic figure. Al- 
though some details in the two inscriptions are difficult to 
explain, this theory has been very generally accepted. A 


122 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


comparison of the Agias with the Apoxyomenus, however, 
reveals so many differences that many critics find it hard to 
associate both statues with the same sculptor. In its slender 
proportions and small head, the figure at Delphi agrees well 
with the statue in the Vatican. But the modelling reveals 
much less interest in ana- 
tomical detail, and the 
face with its deep-set eyes, 
recalling the intensity of 
Scopasian heads, is cer- 
tainly more expressive 
than the face of the Apox- 
yomenus. In explanation 
of these differences, it may 
be said that the copyist 
who made the Agias prob- 
ably did not attempt to 
reproduce the modelling 
of the original bronze ex- 
actly —the practice of 
making exact copies is 
certainly later than the 
fourth century—and since 
the Agias is a portrait, al- 
though Agias himself lived 
in the fifth century, there 
may have been an earlier 
statue, or perhaps only a 
tradition about his ap- 
pearance, which would ac- 
FIG. 64—APOXYOMENUS. VATICAN, count for the eye ont 
ROME Under these conditions, it 

is safest to accept both 

statues as reflections of Lysippic works, made at widely 
different times and by sculptors of quite different tendencies. 
A somewhat similar problem is presented by the numerous 
portraits of Alexander the Great. There is no reason to doubt 
the tradition that Lysippus made many portraits of the great 
conqueror, but when we try to determine which among the 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FOURTH CENTURY 123 


many preserved likenesses of Alexander go back to him, we 
are involved in many difficulties, not the least of which is due 
to our real ignorance of the personal style of the sculptor. 
So, also, in regard to many other works which show the 
slender proportions of the Lysippic canon combined with 
other traits that are found 
in the Apoxyomenus and the 
Agias, it is impossible to say 
with certainty that they re- 
produce statues by Lysippus 
himself; and critics have to 
be content with assigning 
them to the school of Lysip- 
pus, or to the still more in- 
definite category of “works 
under Lysippic influence.”’ 
The number of such statues, 
at all events, is sufficient: to 
confirm the ancient tradition 
of the influence of Lysippus 
on his contemporaries and 
successors. 

Relhef sculpture. The 
Mausoleum. For the study 
of fourth century relief, the 
most important single monu- 
ment is the Mausoleum at 
Halicarnassus, the elaborate 
tomb built for Mausolus, 
satrap of Caria, about the 
middle of the fourth cen- FIG. 65—AGIAS. MUSEUM, DELPHI. 
tury. Many parts of the (PHOTO. ALINARI) 
decoration of this famous 
building have been recovered and are now, for the most 
part, in the British Museum. Besides numerous reliefs, 
they include portrait statues of Mausolus and his wife, Ar- 
temisia, fragments of a colossal four-horse chariot, which was 
placed at the top of the monument, several lions, and frag- 
ments of standing figures and horsemen. All of these are 


124 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


interesting, especially the portrait statues, which are treated 
in a somewhat more realistic manner than the portraits of the 
fifth century, but show in many details, especially in the 
drapery, the influence of the earlier period. The most im- 
portant relics are the slabs of a long relief, representing a 
battle of Greeks and Amazons—the most extensive single 
frieze that has come down to us from this period (Fig. 66). 
The figures exhibit many of the qualities of fourth century 
statues: slenderer proportions, more detail in modelling, and 
greater expressiveness, especially in the faces. Other qualities 


FIG. 66—BATTLE OF GREEKS AND AMAZONS, FROM THE MAUSOLEUM AT 
HALICARNASSUS. BRITISH MUSEUM, LONDON. (PHOTO. MANSELL) 


are a great fondness for lively and vigorous poses, neglect of 
isocephalism, wide spacing of the figures, and use of flying 
drapery to fill vacant spaces. In all these respects, the relief 
recalls the works of the non-Phidian group of Attic sculptors, 
and it seems a fair inference that it was from them, rather 
than from the Phidian reliefs of the fifth century, that the 
sculptors of the Mausoleum drew their inspiration. 

These sculptors, if we may believe Pliny, were four, Scopas, 
Timotheus, Leochares, and Bryaxis; and many attempts, 
naturally, have been made to assign parts of the decoration 
to one or another of these masters. None of the attempts has 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FOURTH CENTURY 125 


yet met with general acceptance, largely because, with the 
exception of Scopas, so little is surely known about the style 
of the artists. For Timotheus, we have the evidence of some 
decorative sculptures from the temple of Asclepius at Epi- 
daurus (built about 375 B.C.), of which the most important 
are two Nereids riding on sea-horses and a mounted Amazon. 
These are shown by an inscription to be partly the work of 
Timotheus himself, partly from his designs. Their most 
striking feature is the thin, clinging drapery, recalling that 
of the Victories on the balustrade of Athena Nike. Leochares 
is represented by a copy, in the Vatican, of his Ganymede and 
the Eagle, a cleverly designed group, in which a sense of 
motion is well suggested by the upward gaze of the figures. 
Bryaxis’s name is carved on a base in Athens decorated with 
figures of three horsemen, which he probably designed. New 
discoveries may some day throw further light on the distinc- 
tive traits of these sculptors and the share that each had in 
the decoration of the Mausoleum. Even if the problem of au- 
thorship proves insoluble, the sculptures from the Mausoleum 
furnish important evidence for the tendencies of fourth cen- 
tury art, especially in relief sculpture. 

The Attic grave reliefs. Another significant group of fourth 
century reliefs is the great series of gravestones from Attica 
and the neighboring districts. In respect to subjects, these 
follow the older tradition in representing the occupant of 
the tomb engaged in some simple action of daily life. But 
the form of the stele is considerably developed, until in many 
cases it resembles a small shrine, and the number of figures 
is often increased to five or six. The favorite type is what 
may be called the “family group,’ with two figures clasp- 
ing hands (one of them commonly seated) in the presence of 
one or more others (Fig. 67). In this we may reasonably 
see a reference to the parting of death, though the scene is 
conceived as an ordinary farewell. With rare exceptions, 
all subjects are treated with marked restraint, in a way that 
recalls fifth century reliefs. But the influence of the fourth 
century appears in the expressiveness of the faces and in the 
slender proportions of most of the figures. The workman- 
ship varies greatly, but in general is surprisingly good, so 


126 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


that the gravestones, like the decorative sculptures of the 
Periclean buildings, give us a lively impression of the large 
number of well-trained sculptors at Athens during the great 
age. 


FIG. 67—-GRAVESTONE OF KRINUIA. UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA MUSEUM, 
PHILADELPHIA 


General character of fourth century sculpture. In the 
fourth century, no less than in the preceding period, the 
Greek sculptors devoted themselves to the human figure and 
endeavored to express their ideals of the highest beauty. But 
they did not depart quite so far from the human model as 
their predecessors had done, and their striving for graceful- 


GREEK SCULPTURE: FOURTH CENTURY 127 


ness and the expression of emotion resulted in many changes. 
In the fourth century, the gods descend a little from Olympus 
and become more like ordinary human beings, and figures of 
athletes and portrait statues are more individual in expression 
than those of the preceding age. But these are differences in 
degree, not in fundamental ideas. To later generations, the 
statues and reliefs of the fourth century have sometimes ap- 
pealed more strongly than the severer types of the earlier 
time; but in general, the works of both periods have been 
equally admired, and the years between 450 and 323 are 
usually regarded as the “great age” of Greek sculpture. The 
fame of the sculptors of the great age rests primarily on the 
fact that, in the field that they chose to cultivate, figure 
sculpture, they produced works that no later masters have 
surpassed, and established standards of which the validity 
has never been seriously questioned. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


Both E. A. Gardner’s Six Greek Sculptors and A. Furt- 
wangler’s Meisterwerke der griechischen Plastik (see page 111) 
contain interesting discussions of the great masters of the fourth 
century. Useful monographs on individual artists are W. Klein’s 
Prazxiteles, Leipzig, 1898; G. Perrot’s Praxitéle, Paris, 1905; and 
M. Collignon’s Lysippe, Paris, 1905. A good summary of. the 
modern discussions about Lysippus is given in W. W. Hyde’s 
Olympic Victor Monuments and Greek Athletic Art, Washing- 
ton, 1921, pp. 286 ff. The great series of Attic gravestones may 
be conveniently studied in A. Conze’s Die attischen Grabreliefs, 
Berlin, 4 vols., 1890-1922, which is a corpus of monuments of 
this class. P. Gardner’s Sculptured Tombs of Hellas, New York, 
1896, gives a more popular account of Greek funerary sculpture. 


CHAPTER VII 
GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 


Political history. The death of Alexander was followed 
by many struggles, as his successors fought for portions of his 
great empire. The kingdoms that resulted from these 
struggles were essentially Greek, but the habits and customs 
of the native populations brought about many changes, so 
that the Greek world after Alexander was very different from 
what it had been before. The later age of Greek civilization, 
therefore, is called the Hellenistic period, to distinguish it 
from the earlier centuries of pure Greek, or Hellenic, culture. . 
This period may be dated from the death of Alexander in 
323 to the Roman conquest of Greece in 146 B. C. Ulti- 
mately, all the Hellenistic kingdoms were absorbed by the 
growing power of Rome, and the years from 146 to the 
establishment of the Roman Empire in 27 B. C. are con- 
veniently called the Graeco-Roman period. In a broader 
sense, the term Hellenistic is often used of the whole develop- 
ment of ancient sculpture from the death of Alexander to the 
end of the Roman Empire, since the influence of Greek 
ideas is evident in many ways in the products of the Greco- 
Roman period and the Roman age. 

Influence of new conditions. Among the changes that 
were brought about by the conquests of Alexander, one of the 
most noteworthy was a shift in the centres of Greek life 
and thought. In the Hellenistic age, these were either new 
cities in the East founded by Alexander or his successors, 
such as Alexandria and Antioch, or ancient towns in Asia 
Minor, such as Pergamum, Ephesus, and Rhodes, which rose 
to new importance as a result of the eastward extension of 
the Greek world. With these, rather than with the cities of the 

128 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 129 


mainland, the great schools of Hellenistic sculpture are as- 
sociated, and their importance continued even after the de- 
mand in Italy for Greek works brought about a revival of 
activity among the sculptors of the mainland. The sculp- 
ture of the post-Alexandrian age reflects the changed char- 
acter of Greek civilization. It is much less uniform than 
that of earlier centuries, displaying in many cases a striving 
for novel and striking effects and an increasingly realistic 
method of treatment. Some works, however, still preserve 
much of the spirit of the earlier time, and with these we 
can best begin our study. 

The Victory of Samothrace. The Victory of Samothrace 
(Fig. 68) was set up in the island of that name in the early 
years of the Hellenistic period, probably to commemorate 
the naval victory which Demetrius Poliorcetes won over 
Ptolemy of Egypt in the year 306. The goddess stands on 
the prow of a ship, and coins of Demetrius, on which the 
figure was copied, show that with her right hand she held 
a trumpet to her lips and in her left she carried a long stake, 
as if she were proclaiming the success of the victors and 
preparing to set up a trophy. In the sturdy, vigorous figure 
and the long sweeping lines of the robe, there is much of the 
spirit of the great age. The new tendencies appear in the 
rather theatrical pose and the agitated folds of the drapery, 
with emphasis on minor details, such as an earlier sculptor 
would have eliminated. Yet these tendencies are well re- 
strained, and the statue fully deserves its fame as one of 
the finest embodiments of the idea of victory in the whole 
range of ancient sculpture. 

The Tyche of Antioch. For Antioch, the city built by 
Seleucus on the Orontes River to be the capital of the king- 
dom of Syria, a bronze figure of the Tyche, or Fortune, of 
the city is said to have been made by Eutychides, a pupil 
of Lysippus. In later times, the statue was copied on coins 
of Antioch, and through the coins a marble copy of the statue 
has been recognized (Fig. 69). The attributes and the de- 
tails seem clearly to be due to a desire to make every feature 
significant of some aspect of the city itself. The rocky seat 
suggests the hill on which the town was built; the mural 


FIG. 68—VICTORY OF SAMOTHRACE. LOUVRE, PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 131 


crown, its battlements and towers; the ears of wheat, the 
fertility of the surrounding plain; and the swimming figure, 
on whose shoulder the goddess rests her foot, is, no doubt, 
the god of the river Orontes. In all this elaborate allegory, 
we see the taste of an erudite and pedantic age, such as is 
suggested by many works of Hellenistic literature. But the 
simple folds of the robes 
show thatthe figure is 
not far removed from the 
period of the great mas- 
ters. The original must 
have been modelled early 
in the third century. 
The Aphrodite of Me- 
los. To the third or the 
second century we must 
probably assign the fam- 
ous Venus de Milo (Fig. 
70), perhaps the most 
generally admired of all 
Greek statues. Even to- 
day, after a full century 
of discussion, most of the 
problems connected with 
this figure are still un- 
solved. Some critics, 
basing their opinion on 
the evident idealization, 
both in the head and in 
the drapery, would as- 
sign it to a master of the FIG. 69—TYCHE OF ANTIOCH. VATICAN, 
fifth century. But this ROME 
seems impossible, in view 
of the marked expressiveness of the face, which is sug- 
gestive of fourth century art, and, more particularly, of 
Praxiteles. The proportions, moreover, with the remarkably 
small head, exaggerate the Lysippic canon, in a way that 
might be expected in the period after Lysippus. It 1s also 
true that the electicism that appears in the combination of 


132 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


traits of different epochs is most easily explained by the as- 
sumption that the maker was a sculptor of the later period. 
An inscribed block which was found with the statue contained 
some letters of the name of a sculptor from Antioch on the 
Meander. Since this town was not founded until 281 B.C., 
the inscription would go far 
to settle the date of the 
statue, if it could be proved 
to belong to it. But, un- 
fortunately, the block has 
disappeared, and the evi- 
dence for its connection 
with the Aphrodite is far 
from conclusive. It is best, 
therefore, to regard the fig- 
ure as the creation of an 
unknown Hellenistic sculp- 
tor, who drew his inspira- 
tion from the works of his 
great predecessors and suc- 
ceeded in producing a 
statue that rivals. their 
finest products. and seems 
i. A to sum up in itself the ef- 
8 forts of many generations 

FIG. 70—APHRODITE OF MELOS. LOUVRE, is 
PARIG) | (PHOTO. GIRAGDON) to express the Greek ideal 

of the goddess of Love. 
The Apollo Belvedere and the Artemis of Versailles. Simi- 
lar controversies have raged about two other popular and 
familiar statues, the Apollo Belvedere (Fig. 71) and the 
Artemis of Versailles. That these are derived from works 
of a single sculptor, or at least, of a single school, is evident — 
from their close similarity, extending even to small de- 
tails, ike the sandals. Both are Roman copies of bronze 
originals, which were very surely works of the Hellenistic 
period. They have, however, been attributed to the fourth 
century, and, more definitely, to Leochares (cf. pp. 124f.). The 
small heads and the slender proportions make it impossible, 
in any event, to place them earlier than the fourth century. 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 133 


The principal arguments for a Hellénistic date are the de- 
cidedly theatrical poses and the great elimination of anatomi- 
cal details, which are so far slurred over and lost as to pro- 
duce an almost unnatural 
effect. Such qualities are 
most readily explained as 
due to a late sculptor, who 
exaggerated the manner- 
isms of earlier artists in 
his attempt to imitate 
them. 

The Alexander sarcoph- 
agus. The chance discov- 
ery in 1887 of an under- 
ground tomb at Sidon in 
Pheenicia led to the recov- 
ery of seventeen large sar- 
cophagi, several of them 
of Greek workmanship, 
which are now among the 
principal treasures of the 
Ottoman Museum in Con- 
stantinople. The largest 
and most splendid is called 
the Alexander sarcopha- 
gus, from the figure of the conqueror which is carved on each 
of the longer sides. In one relief, Alexander appears in a 
battle between Greeks and Persians (Fig. 72) ; in the other, he 
is engaged in a lion-hunt, with companions in Persian and in 
Greek costume. On the ends are other scenes of battle and 
hunting. The monument was undoubtedly made for some fol- 
lower of Alexander who wished to commemorate on his tomb 
‘his association with the great monarch. It must have been 
carved, therefore, early in the Hellenistic age. With this date 
the style of the reliefs is in full accord. Single figures, in some 
cases, are reminiscent of types employed in the reliefs of the 
great age; the Greeks, especially, are often represented in 
more or less idealized forms. But the Persian dress is copied 
with painstaking care, and many of the faces suggest portraits 


FIG. 71—APOLLO BELVEDERE. VATICAN, 
ROME 


134 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


and are treated with marked realism. The most interesting 
feature of the Alexander sarcophagus, however, is the remark- 
able preservation of the color with which the relief was 
enlivened. Even today, when the pigments have faded con- 
siderably, the sarcophagus from a little distance seems more 
like a painting than like a relief. The delicate colors, skil- 
fully applied, enhance, without obscuring, the finely carved 
surfaces, and give us an impression of the possibilities of 


FIG. 72—ALEXANDER SARCOPHAGUS. OTTOMAN MUSEUM, CONSTANTINOPLE 


painted sculpture such as we gain from no other ancient 
monument. 

The First School of Pergamum. The Dedications of At- 
talus I. The tendency towards greater realism in Hellenistic 
art is very marked in the so-called Dedications of Attalus I. 
These were a series of elaborate groups.get up on the acropolis 
of Pergamum and the Athenian acropolis during the reign of 
Attalus (241-197 B.C.), to commemorate his victories over 
the bands of roving Gauls who had several times invaded 
his territory. At Athens, Pausanias tells us, four subjects 
were represented—the contest of the gods and the giants, that 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 135 


of the Athenians and the Amazons, the battle of Marathon, 
and Attalus’s own struggle with the Gauls. The intention 
clearly was to suggest a parallelism between the victories 
of Attalus and the repulse of the Persians in the fifth cen- 
tury and to correlate these historical battles with two of 
the most famous of mythical contests. At Pergamum, only 
the defeat of the Gauls is mentioned, but it may be that the 
other subjects also were represented there. The original 
groups were of bronze, the Pergamenian figures life-size, those 


FIG. 73—DYING GAUL. CAPITOLINE MUSEUM, ROME 


at Athens about three feet high. These bronze figures have 
perished, but in marble a number of single figures and one 
group have survived, relics, evidently, of copies of which there 
is no literary record. All are carved in the same marble, 
which is believed to come from Asia Minor, and they prob- 
ably were made by Pergamenian sculptors during the reign 
of Attalus. A single example will serve to show the quali- 
ties of all—the famous statue in Rome called the Dying 
Gladiator (Fig. 73). In reality, it represents a Gaul, who, 
in spite of a severe wound, tries to struggle to his feet and 
fight on. The fame of the statue rests partly on the restraint 


136 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


with which the idea of death in battle is handled, partly on 
the extremely. accurate and skilful representation of the figure 
in a difficult position. In the restrained handling, we may, 
perhaps, see something of the spirit of the great age; it is the 
anguish of defeat rather than the physical agony of death 
that the sculptor has chosen to emphasize. The realistic 
treatment, on the other hand, is something quite different 
from the usual practice of earlier sculptors. Every detail 
of bone and muscle is carefully rendered; the drops of blood 
which flow from the wound are represented plastically; the 
thick, bushy hair, the short, bitten moustache, and the char- 
acteristic torques, or twisted necklace, of the Gaul are pains- 
takingly reproduced; and on the ground are a shield, a 
trumpet, and a sword (the latter due to a justifiable restora- 
tion), the litter of the battlefield. But there is no exaggera- 
tion. The sculptor’s aim was to reproduce nature closely, 
and this he has done with great skill. Such tempered and 
restrained realism is characteristic of the works of the First 
Pergamenian school, as the group of sculptors who were ac- 
tive during the reign of Attalus I is commonly called. 

The Second School of Pergamum. The Altar of Zeus and 
Athena. The successor of Attalus I on the throne of Per- 
gamum was Eumenes IT (197-159 B.C.), and under this king 
another group of sculptors was active, who are called the 
Second Pergamenian school. Their most important work was 
the altar of Zeus and Athena. Many parts of this elaborate 
structure were found by the Germans during their exploration 
of the acropolis of Pergamum in the eighties of the last cen- 
tury. It consisted of a massive rectangular platform, on the 
top of which, in a court surrounded by a colonnade and ap- 
proached by a monumental stairway, was the altar for sacri- 
fice. Two friezes decorated this structure, the great frieze, 
which ran all around the outside of the platform and meas- 
ured something over 400 feet long and seven feet high, and a 
smaller frieze, which was probably placed inside the colon- 
nade. The subject chosen for the great frieze, the battle of 
the gods and the giants, shows great confidence on the part 
of the designer. It was one that had been treated many times 
before, and seems at first sight a very hackneyed theme. Yet 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 1387 


the Pergamene designer succeeded in producing a really 
original composition, and the method by which he accom- 
plished this is typical of the Hellenistic age. Since the great 
gods of Olympus could not be made to fill the length of the 
frieze, he added to them many of the lesser deities of the 
Greek pantheon. Some of these would probably have been 
hard even for a Greek to recognize, and the names that were 
written above them were doubtless necessary for complete 
understanding. The gods are accompanied by their appro- 
priate attendants and animals, and these too take part in the 
struggle. Among the giants, some are represented as earlier 
artists conceived them, in human form, although wilder and 
fiercer than ordinary men, but many are monsters, only partly 
human. Some have serpents in place of legs; several have 
great wings attached to their backs; and there are many other 
combinations of human and animal forms. Their names, 
which were inscribed below, are sometimes familiar, but 
often strange. The result is a design of great variety, very 
different from the simpler compositions of the great period, 
a design that reflects the spirit of a learned and artificial 
age. 

In the carving of the figures, also, we find a marked de- 
parture from earlier tradition (Fig. 74). The relief every- 
where is high, so that some figures are practically in the 
round. The folds of the robes are universally agitated and 
deeply cut, hair falls in masses of undercut curls, eyes are 
deep-set and often gaze upward in a way that recalls the 
style of Scopas, muscles are exaggerated and represented 
as knotted masses. The total effect 1s one of agitated 
motion, in which there is hardly a single quiet, restful figure. 
Yet the carving itself is masterly. Never has marble been 
made more completely subservient to the sculptor’s chisel. 
Though we may be repelled by the restlessness and the exag- 
geration of the frieze as a whole, we cannot but admire the 
skill with which the design was carried out. Like many 
another Hellenistic work, the great frieze shows clearly 
that there was no loss of power among the sculptors of this 
age. 

The smaller frieze. Although the small frieze of the altar 


138 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


of Pergamum is much more damaged than the great frieze, 
enough of it is preserved to show that this, also, presented 
many novel and interesting features. The subject was the 
story of Telephus, a mythical king of Mysia, the district in 
which Pergamum is situated. Several episodes in the life 
of Telephus were represented in the same field, with no 
marked divisions between them—an interesting revival of 


FIG. 74—ATHENA SLAYING A GIANT, FROM THE GREAT FRIEZE OF THE ALTAR 
AT PERGAMUM. BERLIN 


the continuous method of narration, which we noticed in 
Egyptian and in Mesopotamian monuments, but which was 
not used by the Greek sculptors of the great age. Another 
novelty is the introduction of details of landscape in the 
background of the relief, in marked contrast to the’ practice 
of the fifth and the fourth centuries. 

“Genre” figures. Among the innovations of the Hellenistic 
age was the representation of genre figures, that is, of types 
drawn directly from daily life. The commonest subjects are 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 139 


fishermen and peasants, and the genre figures represent in 
sculpture the same tendency that appears in literature in the 
Idylls of Theocritus. Such figures appealed strongly to the 
Roman patrons of a later day, and many of the examples that 
we have are Roman copies. But a few originals of Hellenistic 
date have been preserved. 
One of the finest is the Old 
Market Woman in the 
Metropolitan Museum, 
New York (Fig. 75). In 
spite of the mutilation 
which the statue has suf- 
fered, the action can be in- 
ferred with practical cer- 
tainty. The left arm was 
lowered, and the hand 
grasped the pair of chickens 
and the basket of fruit 
which are still attached to 
the side. The right hand 
was advanced and _ prob- 
ably held some bit of farm 
produce. The realism which 
is a marked feature of the 
genre figures appears clear- 
ly in the whole pose and the 
wrinkled face and neck. Yet 
something of the older feel- 
ing survives in the carefully 
arranged folds of the gar- 
ments, which might be those 
of a fourth century statue. py. 75—oLp MARKET WOMAN. METRO- 
Boethus. The Boy and POLITAN MUSEUM, NEW YORK 

the Goose. In its careful 

rendering of the characteristics of age, the Old Market 
Woman reflects one tendency of the makers of the genre 
figures, who often represented their subjects as advanced in 
years. At the same time, the opposite extreme was not 
neglected. Figures of children are frequent among the genre 


140 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


types. An excellent example is the group representing a small 
boy struggling with a goose, of which numerous copies are 
preserved. The copies vary considerably, so that it is possible 
that all do not go back to the same original. The type that 
was apparently most pop- 
ular - (Fig. 76) is attrib- 
uted with good reason to 
Boethus of Chalcedon, 
who, according to Pliny, 
made ‘‘a child strangling a 
goose by hugging it.” In- 
scriptions show that Boe- 
thus lived in the second 
century B.C., and a herm 
of bronze with his signa- 
ture was recovered from 
the sea near Tunis in 1908. 
The group of the Boy 
and the Goose is interest- 
ing for its conscious hu- 
mor—a not uncommon 
trait in the Hellenistic 
genre figures — but even 
more for its very careful 
FIG. 76—BOY AND GOOSE. CAPITOLINE rendering of the forms of 
MUSEUM, ROME 4 babyhood. Here again, the 
Hellenistic sculptor  at- 
tained novelty by cultivating a field that the masters of the 
great age had neglected. 7 
Portraits. The portraits of the Hellenistic period, as might 
be expected, show the realistic tendencies of the times. One 
of the finest is the life-size bronze figure found in Rome in 
1884 (Fig. 77), and called the “Hellenistic Ruler,” since it 
probably represents one of the successors of Alexander. Not 
only are the muscles worked out in great detail, but the face 
shows an attempt at exact portraiture, even to the engraving 
of fine lines on the cheeks to render a short, clipped beard. 
Pictorial reliefs. The introduction of picturesque back- 
grounds, such as is found in the small frieze from the 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 141 


Pergamene altar, appears in a series of other reliefs, both 
large and small, which are conveniently grouped together 
under the name of pictorial reliefs (Fig. 78). The same 
monuments are sometimes 
called pastoral reliefs, since 
the subjects of many of 
them are drawn from the 
life of herdsmen and shep- 
herds. Others, however, 
have mythological subjects, 
and the common character- 
istic is the introduction of 
backgrounds of rather 
formal landscape. Many 
of these reliefs were un- 
doubtedly made in Roman 
times, and in recent years 
it has sometimes been 
argued that the pictorial re- 
lief was not invented until 
the period of the Roman 
Empire. But in a. few 
cases, the workmanship 
suggests a Hellenistic date, 
and the Pergamene frieze 
proves the existence of the 
pictorial tendency as early 
as the second century B.C., 
so that here, as in so many 
other cases, it would appear 
that the sculptors of the 
Roman age merely carried 5 r 
on a tradition that origi- " seg ST aa ied 
nated in Hellenistic times, . 
developing especially at Alexandria and other centres in the 
eastern Greek world. 

Damophon of Messene. Before we leave the Hellenistic 
period, mention, at least, should be made of Damophon of 
Messene, almost the only Hellenistic sculptor of the mainland 


142 SOSH ISTORY “OF SGULE Tia 


who is more than a name. Pausanias speaks of several works 
by Damophon, all of which were in the Peloponnesus, and in 
1889, considerable parts of a colossal group of his were found 
in the ruins of a temple at Lycosura in Arcadia. These in- 
clude heads of Demeter, Artemis, and the Titan Anytus, a 
large fragment of drapery, and many smaller bits. The style 


FIG. 78—PEASANT. DRIVING A COW TO MARKET. GLYPTOTHEK, MUNICH 


is curlous, showing in the heads of the deities types which 
lack the dignity of earlier statues of divinities, and in the 
drapery, great use of decoration in low relief imitating 
embroidered patterns. All this suggests a sculptor of individ- 
ual tendencies, who was little affected by the work of his 
contemporaries in other parts of the Greek world. The date 
of Damophon can be determined through inscriptions as the 
second century B.C. 

The Greco-Roman Period (146-27 B.C.). Even before 
the Roman conquest of Greece, the capture of Greek cities in 
southern Italy and the earlier campaigns of Roman generals 
in Greece had been followed by the transportation to Rome 
of many Greek statues. The establishment of Roman rule 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 143 


resulted in further enrichment of the capital at the expense of 
Greek cities and shrines, and created a demand for copies and 
adaptations of older works, to which the Greek sculptors were 
not slow to respond. This was true especially of the sculptors 
of the Greek mainland and of southern Italy. In the eastern 


FIG. 79—LAOCOON AND HIS SONS. VATICAN, ROME 


Greek world, the Hellenistic tradition persisted, and was little, 
if at all, affected by the demands of Roman patrons. 

The School of Rhodes. The Laocoon group. Inscriptions 
show that during late Hellenistic times and in the Greco- 
Roman age, Rhodes was the centre of a flourishing school of 
sculptors, and one work, at least, of this school has been pre- 
served. This is the famous group representing Laocoon and 
his sons entangled by the serpents, as a punishment for the 


144 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


father’s sin (Fig. 79). The group was found in Rome in 
1506, and is very surely the original work of three Rhodian 
sculptors, Agesander, Polydorus, and Athenodorus, which 
Pliny mentions as standing in his day in the palace of the 
Emperor Titus. The date of the sculptors can be fixed by 
means of inscriptions about the year 40 B.C. Owing partly 
to its early discovery and excellent preservation, the Laocodn 
group has enjoyed a greater fame than its intrinsic merits 
warrant. It was long regarded as one of the greatest master- 
pieces of Greek sculpture, and the German critic Lessing used 
it as a basis for an essay on the limitations of sculpture and 
painting, naming the essay after the group, Laocoon. In 
recent years, there has been a tendency to modify the ex- 
travagant praise that earlier critics bestowed upon the work. 
It has been condemned as a mere tour de force, intended only 
to show off the sculptors’ knowledge of anatomy and skill 
in carving marble. It has been argued that the lack of any 
suggestion of reserve force and the emphasis on acute 
physical agony become in the end painful to the spectator 
and are unworthy of perpetuation in marble. There is, un- 
doubtedly, much truth in these criticisms. The ideals of the 
makers of the Laocodn were very different from those of the 
masters of the great age. Yet the group undoubtedly shows 
skilful composition and great ability in extremely realistic 
rendering of the human form. It furnishes further proof that 
the works of the later Greek masters betray no loss of tech- 
nique, but only changed ideals. If we may judge by this 
work, the school of Rhodes was strongly influenced by the 
school of Pergamum. 

The Farnese Bull. The colossal group called the Farnese 
Bull (Fig. 80) also reveals the influence of Pergamenian ideas. 
Made, as Pliny tells us, by Apollonius and Tauriscus, two 
sculptors of Tralles in Asia Minor, it was brought from 
Rhodes to Rome, where it stood in the collection of the 
famous Asinius Pollio. The sculptors probably worked in 
Rhodes during the first century B.C. The group represents 
Amphion and Zethus fastening Dirce to the wild bull by 
which she was dragged to death, a punishment that she 
had devised for Antiope, the mother of the two heroes. Here 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 145 


again, clever composition and skilful workmanship are asso- 
ciated with an essentially unpleasant subject and realistic 
rendering of details; and now that the earlier and more 
idealistic works of the Greek sculptors are better known, the 
group has lost much of the reputation it once enjoyed. Among 
the interesting details are the rocks and trees and the herds of 


FIG. S)N—FARNESE BULL. NATIONAL MUSEUM, NAPLES 


sheep in low relief on the base, recalling the smaller frieze 
of the Pergamenian altar and the pictorial reliefs. 

The School of Ephesus. The Borghese Warror. A work 
that shows the realism of Hellenistic art pushed to an ex- 
treme is the so-called Borghese Warrior (Fig. 81). This bears 
the signature of Agasias, son of Dositheus, of Ephesus. By 
means of the inscription, it may be dated about 100 B.C. and 
brought into connection with other inscriptions which prove 


146 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the existence of a school of sculptors at Ephesus during the 
Greco-Roman period. The statue very surely is meant to 
represent a warrior defending himself against an enemy who 
towers above him, but the sculptor merely suggested his 
equipment by carving on the left arm the arm-band of a 
shield, and in the right 
hand the hilt of a sword. 
What really interested 
him was the detail of 
bone and muscle in a fig- 
ure so posed that every 
muscle is strained to the 
utmost, and he carried this 
idea so far that there is 
no suggestion of the tex- 
ture of the flesh. The 
statue creates much the 
same impression as the 
flayed models that are 
made for teaching anat- 
omy, and, indeed, the 
Borghese Warrior is often 
used for this purpose in 
drawing schools. That it 
breaks the rule of reserved 
force is obvious, but 
Agasias would probably 
FIG. 81—BORGHESE WARRIOR. LOUVRE, have denied the validity 
PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) of any such rule. 

The Laocoon, the Farn- 
ese Bull, and the Borghese Warrior show how Hellenistic ideas 
persisted in Asia Minor and the neighboring islands. In these 
regions, Roman ideas never exercised any strong influence. 
The Hellenistic forms were dominant throughout the period 
of Roman rule, until, modified by new ideas from the East, 
they formed the basis of the Early Christian development. 

The Neo-Attic School. In the western Greek world, on the 
other hand, the effects of the Roman conquest were imme- 
diately felt. One interesting development was a revival of 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 147 


activity among the sculptors of Attica. This is proved by a 
number of statues and reliefs with signatures, in which the 
artist records his name and appends the adjective ’A@nvaios, 
an Athenian. The purpose of such an addition must have 
been to increase the value of the work by showing that the 
maker was trained in a famous school. Whether these men 
worked in Athens for the Italian market, or whether they 
actually migrated to Italy, where most of their works have 
been found, cannot be surely determined. The statues and 
reliefs, at all events, together with unsigned works that show 
similar qualities, are conveniently grouped together as works 
of the Neo-Attic school. Their one common quality is de- 
pendence on earlier types. Some are exact copies of famous 
works, like a bronze head in Naples, signed by Apollonius, son 
of Archias, which is copied from the Doryphorus of Poly- 
clitus. In other cases, the later sculptor changed his model 
in various ways. The colossal Farnese Heracles in Naples, 
which bears the signature of Glycon, is based on a Lysippic 
original, but betrays in its heavy and swollen muscles the 
taste of a later day. The so-called Germanicus in the Louvre, 
the work of Cleomenes, is a portrait of a Roman, but the nude 
body is modelled on a type of Hermes created in the fifth 
century. The famous “Venus dei Medici” in Florence, al- 
though the signature has been proved a modern forgery, is 
probably the work of a Neo-Attic sculptor. In it the type 
of Praxiteles’s Aphrodite of Cnidus is so modified as to lose 
much of its divinity and to become little more than a beauti- 
ful woman. 

The eclectic, imitative character of the work of the Neo- 
Attic sculptors is even more evident in their reliefs than in 
their statues in the round. In the reliefs, all sorts of types 
drawn from works of earlier times are combined in different 
ways to produce a decorative effect. The same types recur 
in varying combinations, often with no attempt at unity of 
style. Archaistic types, that is, figures in which the man- 
nerisms of the archaic period are imitated and exaggerated, 
are not infrequently combined with others in the style of 
the great age. The result is often not unpleasing, in spite of 
the unoriginal character of the work, and the vogue of these 


148 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


reliefs, as decorations in gardens and houses, is readily under- 
stood. nee 
The School of Pasiteles. Another group of Greco-Roman 
sculptors, recognized through a combination of literary 
and monumental evidence, 
is the school of Pasiteles. 
From several notices in 
Pliny and one in Cicero, 
it appears that Pasiteles 
was a Greek of southern 
Italy, who obtained Ro- 
man citizenship and won a 
considerable reputation in 
Rome during the first half 
of the first century B.C. 
No work of his has yet 
been identified, but fur- 
ther evidence of his fame 
is afforded by a statue 
now in the Villa Albani in 
Rome (Fig. 82), which is 
signed by Stephanus, ‘“‘pu- 
pil of Pasiteles.” The 
purpose of this unusual 
form of signature must be 
the same as that of the 
Neo-Attic sculptors in ap- 
pending ’A@yvatos to their 
names; it was meant to 
enhance the value of the 
work by showing that 
Stephanus was trained in 
a good school. The statue 


FIG. 82—STATUE SIGNED BY  STE- ; 
PHANUS. VILLA ALBANI, ROME presents many curious 


features. Its stiff and 
formal pose, knobby shoulders, hard treatment of the 
muscles, prominent eyes, meaningless smile and formal hair 
recall the statues of the early fifth century, but the small 
head and the slender proportions are such as no fifth century 


GREEK SCULPTURE AFTER ALEXANDER 149 


sculptor would have adopted. Clearly, therefore, the work 
is imitative, like so many products of the Neo-Attic artists. 
Through this statue several unsigned works with similar 
qualities are assigned with great probability to the Pasi- 
telean school, and it has sometimes been argued that Pasiteles 
and his followers devoted themselves especially to the imita- 
tion of works of the transitional period. But this inference 
is not justified by the evidence. Another work of the school 
shows no trace of transitional mannerisms, but seems rather 
to have been modelled on statues of the fourth century. This 
is a group in the National Museum in Rome, signed by Mene- 
laus, “pupil of Stephanus.” It appears, therefore, that the 
ideals of this coterie of sculptors did not differ greatly from 
those of the Neo-Attic school. Both drew their inspiration 
from earlier creations of different periods, which they imi- 
tated and modified to please their Roman patrons. 

General character of post-Alexandrian sculpture. © The 
most prominent characteristic of the work of the later Greek 
masters is its great variety. Alongside of sculptors who looked 
back to earlier times and drew their inspiration from the 
men of a former day, others attacked new problems and cul- 
tivated new fields. The most important tendency is the in- 
creasing realism of treatment. Others are the theatrical 
quality and the restlessness of many of the products of this 
time. But some works prove clearly the persistence of the 
older ideals, and the Neo-Attic sculptors and the followers of 
Pasiteles appear to mark a definite reaction from the exag- 
gerations of the Pergamenians. The varied character of 
Greek civilization after the conquests of Alexander is closely 
reflected in Hellenistic and Greco-Roman sculpture. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


G. Dickins’s Hellenistic Sculpture, Oxford, 1920 (published 
after the death of the author), is an attempt to define more 
exactly the qualities of the various schools of post-Alexandrian 
sculpture and is full of interesting suggestions. The monuments 
discovered at Pergamum are elaborately published in the work 


150 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


ealled Altertiimer von Pergamon, issued by the Royal Museums 
in Berlin; especially important for the student of sculpture are 
Vol. III, 2, Die Friese des groszen Altars, 1909, 1910, by 
H. Winnefeld, and Vol. VII, Die Skulpturen, mit Ausnahme der 
Altarreliefs, by F. Winter. <A well-illustrated semi-popular ac- 
count of the Great Altar and other Pergamenian monuments is 
given in E. Pontremoli and M. Collignon’s Pergame, Paris, 1900. 
The Alexander sarcophagus is described, with excellent colored 
plates, in O. Hamdy-Bey and T. Reinach’s Une nécropole royale 
a Sidon, Paris, 1892-96, and F. Winters Der Alexander- 
Sarkophag aus Sidon, Strassburg, 1912. The “Hellenistic reliefs” 
are collected in T. Schreiber’s Die hellenistischen Reliefbildern, 
Leipzig, 1889-94. For the Neo-Attic reliefs, the fundamental 
work is F. Hauser’s Die neuattischen Reliefs, Stuttgart, 1889. 


CHAPTER VIII 
ROMAN SCULPTURE 


Long before the Romans became the rulers of a world 
empire, Rome was a prosperous city, and the squares and 
public buildings were decorated with statues and reliefs. 
Our knowledge of early Roman sculpture depends almost 
entirely on literary sources, since comparatively few monu- 
ments of regal or republican Rome have been preserved. The 
most important are a few portraits of late republican date, 
which are carved, in general, in a decidedly realistic manner. 
From the literary notices, however, it is clear that the earliest 
sculpture was strongly influenced by Etruscan models— 
Etruscan artists were invited to Rome to decorate public 
buildings, such as the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, erected 
in the sixth century—and that later, especially from the third 
century on, Greek influences more and more prevailed, until 
in the Greco-Roman age, many Greek sculptors found 
profitable employment in catering to Roman demands. 

Etruscan sculpture. Since many monuments of Etruscan 
sculpture have been preserved, we can gain some idea of the 
nature of the earliest statues and reliefs in Rome. Figure 83 
represents a well-preserved Apollo of terracotta found on the 
site of Veli in 1916, which is a remarkable example of Etrus- 
can sculpture from the last years of the sixth century. It 
is evident at a glance that the artist was familiar with con- 
temporary Greek figures. In the almond-shaped eyes, the 
smiling mouth, the elaborate locks of hair, and the robe with 
its zigzag edge, the mannerisms of Ionic sculpture of the later 
archaic period are readily recognized. Other Etruscan works 
show similar dependence on Greek models of different periods. 
Although Etruscan sculpture has certain traits of its own, 
especially a fondness for rather heavy figures, decided realism 

151 


152 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


in portraiture and, usually, careless execution in details, it 
clearly owed much to Greek inspiration. 

Greek influence. Meaning of Roman sculpture. Greece, 
therefore, appears to have exercised a double influence on 


FIG. 88—APOLLO FROM VEII. ROMB, 
MUSEO DI VILLA PAPA GIULIO. (FROM 
3 ” 

NOTIZIE DEGLII SCAVI,” 1919, PL. 2) 


Rome, at first indirectly 
through Etruria, and later 
directly, through the trans- 
portation to Rome of Greek 
originals and the production 
by Greek artists of copies 
and imitations for the 
Roman market. Through- 
out the period of the Em- 
pire, the Greek influence 
persisted. Most of the 
sculptors of this period ap- 
pear to have been Greeks, 
and the making of copies 
and imitations of Greek 
statues and reliefs formed a 
considerable part of their 
activity. But alongside of 
these essentially Greco- 
Roman works, other monu- 
ments were created which 
expressed Roman ideas, and 
it is to these, rather than 
to the imitations of Greek 
models, that the term Ro- 
man sculpture is commonly 
applied. The most impor- 
tant classes of such monu- 
ments are historical reliefs, 
carved to decorate memo- 
rials of military triumphs 


or other important events, and portrait statues and busts. 
Many critics, to be sure, see little that is essentially 
Roman in these works, arguing that the innovations found 
in them are to be traced to Hellenistic Greek sources, to 


ROMAN SCULPTURE 153 


schools of sculpture in Asia Minor, Alexandria, and Antioch. 
But even if many of the characteristic traits of Roman 
sculpture are dependent on new ideas from the Hellenized 
East, it seems clear that the need of expressing the power 
and the grandeur of Rome led the sculptors to develop the 
new ideas more elaborately than before and that the monu- 
ments thus created may properly be called Roman. 

The Augustan age (27 .B.C.-14 A.D.). The sculpture of 
the reign of Augustus shows the effect of that reaction against 
the exaggerations of the Hellenistic schools which appears 
in the sculpture of the Greco-Roman period. Augustan 
sculpture is characterized by academic correctness and dig- 
nity. Very Greek in many of its qualities, it nevertheless 
exhibits new tendencies that are essentially Roman. 

The Augustus of Prima Porta. One of the noblest monu- 
ments of the Augustan period is the portrait of the Emperor 
discovered at Prima Porta in 1863 (Fig. 84). Augustus is 
represented as a military commander haranguing his troops. 
Many details are obviously copied from life and reveal the 
realistic spirit that is found in the portraits of republican 
times. The reliefs on the breastplate, the fringes of the tunic, 
the folds of the military cloak are carefully imitated. But 
the bare feet, the Cupid riding on a dolphin—intended, no 
doubt, to recall the fact that Venus was the ancestress of 
the Julian family—and the similarity in pose and proportions 
to the Doryphorus of Polyclitus all show how strongly the 
sculptor was influenced by Greek ideas. The calm, self- 
contained expression of the face is very characteristic of the 
Augustan age, and is found in many other portraits of the 
time. | 
_ The Ara Pacis Auguste. Of Augustan relief, the finest ex- 
amples are the numerous fragments that have been preserved 
from the decoration of the Ara Pacis Auguste. This “Altar 
of Augustan Peace” was voted by the Senate on the return of 
Augustus from Gaul and Spain in the year 13 B.C., and was 
dedicated not quite four years later, in the year 9. The actual 
altar was surrounded by a paved square and enclosed by a 
marble wall some twenty feet high, measuring about thirty- 
seven feet long on two sides and about thirty-five on the 


154 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


other two. The wall was elaborately decorated with reliefs 
both inside and out. Among the subjects were scenes of sac- 
rifice, an allegorical figure of Tellus, Mother Earth, between 
personifications of the Air and the Water, elaborate garlands 
of fruit and flowers suspended from ox-skulls, scrolls of 


FIG. 84—AUGUSTUS FROM PRIMA PORTA. VATICAN, ROME 


foliage with buds and flowers attached, and two long proces- 
sions of dignitaries, presumably representing the ceremonies 
at the foundation of the altar. Some portions merely con- 
tinue the Hellenistic tradition. The scenes of sacrifice and 
the Tellus relief closely resemble the “pictorial” reliefs. 
The garlands and the scrolls have their prototypes in Hellen- 
istic decoration, but are much more elaborate and more realis- 


ROMAN SCULPTURE 155 


tically treated than anything that we know of earlier date. 
In the garlands (Fig. 85), the relief is very high at the centre 
and grows lower towards the sides, suggesting the form of 
an actual garland much more closely than the rather flat 
relief, with sharply defined edges, which is common in the 
simpler garlands of the Hel- 
lenistic age; and in the 
scrolls of foliage, a growing 
vine is suggested not merely 
by the addition of buds and 
flowers, but also by the in- 
troduction of small birds 
and insects, which hover 
about the leaves or crawl 
upon them. In these novel 
features, we may reason- 
ably see the influence of the 
Roman liking for what is 
real and tangible. 

This spirit is even more 
noticeable in the proces- 
sional reliefs (Fig. 86), in 
which the dress in all cases 
is that of daily life and the 
faces are clearly portraits, 
although modern attempts — jy¢. 85—GarLAND FROM THE ARA PACTS 
to identify individuals have avcusrm. NATIONAL MUSEUM, ROME 
not yet met with much 
success. The rather cold correctness and. the dignity of 
Augustan sculpture are here very evident. It is noticeable, 
also, that the figures are not all carved in one plane, as is the 
normal method in Greek reliefs, but some are in considerably 
higher relief than others, so that there is an attempt to sug- 
gest actual depth in space by varying the depth of the relief. 
This attempt at “spatial,” or “tridimensional” effects, which 
in recent years is often called “illusionism,” is one of the 
striking innovations of the Roman age. It probably had its 
origin in experiments made by the artists of the Hellenistic 
period. In the reliefs of the Ara Pacis, we have a compara- 


156 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


tively early stage of the development, with figures arranged 
in two distinct planes. Later, the principle was carried much 
further. 

Julio-Claudian sculpture after Augustus (14-69 A.D.). 
From the reigns of the Julio-Claudian emperors from Tiberius 
to Nero, few remains of larger sculpture have been preserved. 
What we have consists mostly of small marble urns for the 
ashes of the dead and altars which were set up over graves. 
In these, the decoration usually consists of elaborate gar- 


FIG. 86—PROCESSIONAL RELIEF FROM THE ARA PACIS AUGUST. UFFIZI 
GALLERY, FLORENCE. (BRUNN-BRUCKMANN, “DENKMALER,’ PL. 401) 


lands, reminiscent of the garlands of the Ara Pacis, carved 
with the same fidelity to nature, and associated with birds 
and other animals. The so-called “mural reliefs,” slabs of 
terracotta used for the decoration of houses and other build- 
ings, sometimes exhibit similar qualities, but often their de- 
signs were copied directly from Greek models, and show the 
strength of Greek influence. In portraits, on the other hand, 
the calm, academic type of the Augustan age was gradually 
modified by an increasing realism, in which we may fairly 
see the Roman spirit once more asserting itself. 

The Flavian age (69-96. A.D.). The Arch of Titus. The 


ROMAN SCULPTURE 157 


reigns of the Flavian emperors, Vespasian, Titus, and Domi- 
tian, produced the most impressive examples that we have of 
the illusionist manner. These are the famous reliefs on the 
arch of Titus in Rome (Fig. 87). Erected to commemorate 


FIG. 87—RELIEFS ON THE ARCH OF TITUS. ROME 


the Jewish War of 71 A.D., this arch was dedicated in the 
year 81. In its large reliefs, one on either side of the central 
passageway, are represented two scenes from the triumphal 
procession. In one, we see the Emperor in his chariot, ac- 


158 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


companied by lictors and Roman citizens, much as he doubt- 
less appeared in the actual procession. Other figures, how- 
ever, are clearly allegorical: Victory crowns the Emperor, the 
goddess Roma leads the horses, and in front of the chariot 
is the Genius Populi Romani. All of these are ideal figures, 
such as are frequently introduced in reliefs commemorating 
historical events. In the second relief, another part of the 
triumphal procession is shown, with soldiers carrying the 
spoils from the temple at Jerusalem, the long trumpets which 
summoned the people to prayer, the table of the shewbread, 
and the seven-branched candlestick, as well as tablets on 
which were inscribed, originally, the names of the conquered 
cities of Judea. The principle of varying the height of the 
relief to suggest distance is here carried very far. There is no 
longer any question of two or three different planes such as 
we noted in the processional reliefs of the Ara Pacis. Some 
figures are almost in the round, others are sketched in low 
relief on the background, and 
between these extremes, many 
different heights are employed. 
The result is that light and air 
play among the figures, creat- 
ing the illusion of beings ac- 
tually moving in space, in a 
way that had not been so suc- 
cessfully attempted before. 
The reliefs imply an original 
and very skilful sculptor. His 
failure to make his moving 
crowds absolutely convincing 
is due to his ignorance of the 
laws of perspective, which 
were not discovered until 
METROPOLITAN MUSEUM, NEW many centuries later. The 
YORK modern spectator cannot fail 

to be disturbed by the false 
lines of the horses and the chariot, and by the slewing of 
the archway through which the soldiers are supposed to pass. 
But in spite of such faults in these and similar reliefs, it 


FIG. S8—FLAVIAN PORTRAIT HEAD. 


ROMAN SCULPTURE 159 


still remains true that the artists of the Flavian age intro- 
duced new ideas and realized new possibilities in sculpture. 

Flavian portraits. Similar experiments with effects of light 
and shadow appear in the portraits of the Flavian age, in 
which a combination of illusionist principles with a return 
to the realism of earlier days produced some of the most 
successful portrait busts that were ever created (Fig. 88). 
The suggestion of character in these heads is no less remark- 
able than the skilful modelling, so that it is the portraits, 
quite as much as the reliefs of the time, that lead many critics 
to regard the Flavian period as the golden age of Roman 
sculpture. 

Trajan (98-117 A.D.). The Column of Trajan. The monu- 
ments from the reign of Trajan are similar, in many ways, 
to those of the Flavian age. Most conspicuous among them 
is the famous column of Trajan, erected as part of the deco- 
ration of the forum that the Emperor completed and dedi- 
cated about 113 A.D. The reliefs are carried in a spiral 
band about the shaft of the column and exemplify most 
completely another innovation that plays a great part in 
the sculpture of the Roman age, namely, the elaborate work- 
ing out of the continuous method of narration (Fig. 89). In 
these reliefs, the attempt is made to record the whole history 
of Trajan’s two campaigns against the Dacians from the 
crossing of the Danube to the final victory. The single epi- 
sodes are of many kinds—the sacrifice at the beginning of 
the campaign, the building of bridges and fortified camps, the 
Emperor reviewing or exhorting his troops, battles and sieges, 
the bringing in of prisoners, the reception of delegates to 
sue for peace—and these are so combined that one scene 
passes into the next without any sharp dividing line. Every- 
where the Emperor is prominent; he appears some ninety 
times in the 660 feet of the sculptured band. The result of 
this insistence on the imperial figure is that instead of the 
unity of time and place which the Greek sculptors regularly 
observed, we have a kind of unity of idea—the idea of the 
power of the Roman Empire, symbolized by the figure of its 
ruler. One other feature of the column of Trajan suggests 


160 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


oriental rather than Greek models. This is the elaborate 
background of trees and buildings and even whole towns and 
fortified camps, carved on a much smaller scale than the 
human figures, to give the setting of the various events. In 
these portions of the relief and also in the careful rendering 
of the armor, the standards of the legionaries, the facial 


FIG. S9—THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN. ROME 


traits, and the dress of the barbarians, the Roman love of 
realistic detail is everywhere evident. In relief of this sort, 
with many small figures, there is, naturally, little chance for 
‘Gllusionist” treatment, and as a matter of fact, the figures 
of the column of Trajan are carved practically on one level. 

Trajamc reliefs on the Arch of Constantine. That the 
illusionist manner continued to be employed, however, is 
shown by other works of the period. Among the most 


ROMAN SCULPTURE 161 


interesting are four large reliefs taken from one of Trajan’s 
buildings and used to decorate the arch of Constantine. One 
of them is reproduced in Figure 90. Here, clearly, there is 
the same desire to suggest the third dimension as in the re- 
hefs on the arch of Titus. The principal difference lies in 
the closer setting of the figures, which results in an impression 
of crowding, less pleasing, on the whole, than the effect in the 
earlier work. Incidentally, it is interesting that in this relief, 
also, we have an example of the continuous method. At the 


rig. 90—RELIEF ON THE ARCH OF CONSTANTINE. ROME. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


left, the Emperor enters Rome in triumph, escorted by Vic- 
tory and the goddess Roma; at the right, the Roman cavalry 
charge the Dacians, two actions widely separated in time and 
place. 

Hadrian (117-138 A.D.). In the sculpture of the reign of 
Hadrian, the most noticeable change is a reaction from the 
elaboration of Flavian and Trajanic art towards a simpler 
and more idealistic treatment. Portraits lose something of 
their intense realism, and in reliefs there is less attempt at 
spatial effects and less crowding of the figures. It is natural 
to attribute these changes to a new wave of Greek influence. 


162 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Since Hadrian himself was a lover of Greek art and lived for 
some time in Athens, it is generally assumed that they were 
due largely to his personal taste and influence, and the new 
movement is conveniently called the “Hadrianic revival.” An 


FIG. 9I—ANTINOUS AS SILVANUS. NA- 
TIONAL MUSEUM, ROME. (BRUNN- 
BRUCKMANN, “DENKMALER,” PL. 635) 


excellent example of the 
new tendencies is a relief 
found in 1908 not far from 
Rome, in which Antinous is 
represented as Silvanus 
(Fig. 91). Antinols was a 
favorite of Hadrian’s, who, 
after his mysterious death 
in Egypt, where he is said 
to have destroyed himself 
to avert some danger from 
the Emperor, was deified 
and worshipped throughout 
the empire. He was fre- 
quently identified with one 
of the youthful divinities, 
as he is here with Silvanus. 
The simple, standing figure, 
holding a pruning-hook and 
accompanied by a dog, is 
reminiscent of the Attic 
grave reliefs of the fourth 
century, while the altar and 
the grapevine suggest com- 
parison with the Hellenistic 
“pictorial” reliefs. On the 
altar is the signature of the 
sculptor, Antonianus of 
Aphrodisias, a town in 
Caria. There are several 


other works of the early second century signed by artists 
from Aphrodisias, so that it seems clear that at this time a 
“school of Aphrodisias” must have established a considerable 


reputation. 


The Antonine Period (138-192 A.D.). Reliefs. The effects 


ROMAN SCULPTURE 163 


of the Hadrianic revival lasted for many years. They are 
evident in most of the reliefs from the reigns of the Antonine 
emperors, Antoninus Pius (138-161), Marcus Aurelius (161- 
180), and Commodus (180-192). In these, in general, there 
is little crowding of the figures, and attempts at spatial ef- 
fects are not pronounced. Figure 92, in which Marcus 


FIG. 92—RELIEF OF MARCUS AURELIUS. CAPITOLINE MUSEUM, ROME 


Aurelius is represented sacrificing before the temple of Jupiter 
Capitolinus, is a good example. The careful representation 
of actual buildings to show the setting of an action is very 
common in Roman reliefs throughout the period of the Em- 
pire and is another bit of evidence of the Roman love of what 
is real and tangible, in contrast to the idealistic tendency of 
most Greek reliefs. 


164 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


The Column of Marcus Aurelius. The most impressive 
relic of the Antonine period is the column of Marcus Aurelius, 
in which the triumphs of that emperor over the Germans and 
the Sarmatians are celebrated. This monument is clearly 
an imitation of the column of Trajan, with a spiral band of 
reliefs worked out in the continuous method. The transi- 
tions, however, are not quite so cleverly managed as in the 
earlier monument, and the workmanship, on the whole, is 
rather less skilful. 

Portraits. In the portraits of the period, a number of 
interesting changes appear. Hadrian had introduced the 
fashion of wearing a short beard. Under the Antonines, 
ionger beards and longer hair were worn, and the sculptors 
of the time were quick to realize the possibilities of contrast 
between the masses of hair and the flesh of the face. Hair 
and beard were rendered in flowing locks, deeply undercut 
with the drill so as to produce shadows, whereas for the face 
the marble was carefully smoothed and sometimes polished. 
At the same time, the practice of suggesting the eye more 
definitely by outlining the iris and introducing one or two 
drill holes for the pupil—a method occasionally used in 
earlier times—became general. 

The period of decline (192-330 A. D.). Sarcophagi. After 
the death of Commodus, the decline in the sculptor’s art ap- 
pears to have been rapid. Even on the arch of Septimius Seve- 
rus (dedicated in 203 A.D.), the small and carelessly carved 
figures offer a striking contrast to the dignified and carefully 
studied compositions of the public monuments of the preced- 
ing centuries; and from the greater part of the third century, 
no historical reliefs have survived. The brief and troubled 
relgns of the many emperors of this time were nat- 
urally unfavorable to the production of elaborately decorated 
monuments. Our knowledge of the period, therefore, de- 
pends largely on the marble sarcophagi which were carved 
to receive the bodies of the dead. Such monuments are not 
unknown from the earlier centuries, but their use became 
more general during the third century, and great numbers 
of them have been preserved. Since they were made to be 
placed against a wall in underground tombs, only three sides, 


ROMAN SCULPTURE 165 


ordinarily, were decorated with reliefs. The subjects were 
taken almost exclusively from Greek mythology, an interest- 
ing proof of the persistence of Greek influence. Sometimes 
these subjects are such as have a possible reference to death— 
the carrying off of Persephone, Diana and Endymion, Cupid 
and Psyche, and many others. Often, however, they have 
no connection with the use of the sarcophagi—Dionysus and 
his train were constantly represented—and it is evident that 
the makers were simply reproducing traditional compositions 
for decorative effect. But though the subjects are largely 
Greek, the style, with rare exceptions, is that of the later 
Roman monuments. Figures are closely crowded, with deep 
undercutting to produce heavy shadows, though the relief, 
in general, is kept in one plane. Proportions are often incor- 
rect, facial expression is exagg2rated, and the work usually 
betrays haste and carelessness. In the composition, the con- 
tinuous method is frequently employed. 

Later portraits. In the portraits of the later Roman age, 
the decline is not so pronounced. Throughout the third cen- 
tury and even well into the fourth, the makers of portraits 
were still able to reproduce the features of their subjects and 
to suggest character with no little skill, in marked contrast 
to the cruder workmanship of the mass of the sarcophagi. 

Reliefs on the Arch of Constantine. The condition of the 
sculptor’s art towards the close of the period can best be seen 
on one of the most famous of Roman monuments, the arch 
of Constantine. This arch, which probably was erected as 
early as the first century after Christ and afterwards dis- 
mantled, was rededicated by Constantine in the year 315, to 
commemorate his triumph over Maxentius and the firm estab- 
lishment of his power. Much of the sculpture with which it is 
adorned was taken from earlier works, especially from monu- 
ments of Trajan (cf. Fig. 90) and Marcus Aurelius. The 
character of the parts that date from Constantine’s reign 1s 
well shown in Figure 93. The Emperor is here represented 
as he distributes gifts to the people. But how different are 
the figures from those of earlier reliefs! Monotonously 
ranged side by side, they appear more like puppets than like 
participants in a common action. Each seems carved for 


166 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


itself, as a spot in a decorative design, and all details, such 
as the folds of the robes, are superficially and formally ren- 
dered. In the isolation of the individual figures, some critics 
see yet another of those experiments with effects of light and 
shade which so engaged the attention of the sculptors of the 
Roman epoch. But even if this is admitted, the squat and 


FIG. 93—RELIEFS ON THE ARCH OF CONSTANTINE. ROME. — (PHOTO. ALIN ARI) 


dumpy figures bear witness to a marked decline from the 
work of the early empire. Interest in the human figure and 
interest in the grouping of figures to suggest action, which up 
to this time were the leading concerns of the sculptor, seem 
almost entirely lost, and it is clear that we stand on the 
threshold of a new period. 

Roman sculpture in the provinces. Outside of Rome and 
Italy, where Roman sculpture naturally attained its fullest 
development, many monuments similar in character to those 


ROMAN SCULPTURE 167 


of the capital are preserved. In some cases, the workmanship 
is excellent, but for the most part, the authors of these 
monuments were decidedly less skilful than the sculptors of 
the capital, and Roman provincial sculpture is interesting 
primarily for its subjects and for the evidence it affords of 
the extent to which Roman ideas affected the many peoples 
whom the Romans conquered. Such monuments, in general, 
are more numerous in the western than in the eastern pro- 
vinces of the empire. In the eastern provinces, monuments 
of distinctively Roman type are rare. In this region the 
traditions of Hellenistic art persisted with undiminished vigor 
for many years, until, modified by new ideas from Persia and 
the near Orient, they gradually developed into Early Chris- 
tian art. 

General character of Roman sculpture. In a broad sense, 
it is true that Roman sculpture represents the last stage in 
the evolution of Greek sculpture. But it is a mistake, in 
the opinion of the writer, to regard it, as many critics of the 
nineteenth century were inclined to do, as merely a late and 
degenerate phase of the Greek development. In some fields, 
notably in portrait sculpture and in the development of plant 
and foliage ornament, the sculptors of the Roman age ad- 
vanced beyond their predecessors and introduced new ideas 
which profoundly influenced later generations. If, as seems 
probable, they did not invent the “‘illusionistic” style and the 
“continuous method of narration,” they certainly developed 
them more completely and logically than earlier sculptors 
had done. The value of these innovations has been vari- 
ously estimated. By some modern critics, they are re- 
garded as further evidence of the originality and genius of 
the artists of the Roman period, by others, as mistaken at- 
tempts to enlarge the possibilities of sculpture. The attempt 
to suggest depth, as well as height and width, is thought by 
many to be more appropriate to painting than to sculpture, 
and even when it is undertaken with full knowledge of the 
laws of perspective, is held to transgress the bounds of the 
sculptor’s art (see p. 307). The continuous method has been 
characterized by one competent critic as a relic of primitive 
art “which the Greeks had almost civilized off the face of the 


168 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


earth.”” Whatever one may think of these conflicting opin- 
ions, the fact remains that the artists of the Roman age en- 
deavored to realize possibilities in sculpture that the men of 
earlier times had for the most part neglected, and the “Roman 
episode,” as it has sometimes been called, well deserves the 
more careful study that has been devoted to it in recent years. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


The best summary of the achievements of the Etruscans, al- 
though out-of-date in many respects, is still J. Martha’s L’art 
étrusque, Paris, 1889. W. Hausenstein’s Die Bildnerei der 
Etrusker, Berlin, 1922, presents a series of well-selected repro- 
ductions, accompanied by a brief essay on the character of 
Etruscan art. 

The fullest account of Roman sculpture is Mrs. Arthur 
Strong’s Roman Sculpture from Augustus to Constantine, New 
York, 1907. All recent discussions of Roman art owe much to 
F. Wickhoff’s Roman Art, New York, 1900 (a translation by Mrs. 
Strong of the essay first printed as an introduction to Die Wiener 
Genesis, Vienna, 1895). There is a good brief account of Roman 
sculpture in H. B. Walters’s The Art of the Romans, London, 
1911. For important single monuments or groups of monuments, 
the following works may be recommended: E. Courbaud’s Le 
bas-relief romain, Paris, 1899; E. Petersen’s Ara Pacis Auguste, 
Vienna, 2 vols., 1902; W. Altmann’s Architectur und Ornamentik 
der antiken Sarkophage, Berlin, 1902, and Die romischen Grab- 
altdre der Katserzett, Berlin, 1905; and C. Robert’s Die antiken 
Sarkophagreliefs, Berlin, 1890-1904. 


CHAPTER IX 
mee soUnRPEURE OF THE FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 
I. Histor1cAL BACKGROUND 


Christianity began to seek sculptural expression probably 
as early as the second century A.D. The whole production 
from the second or third through the sixth centuries may be 
denominated as Early Christian sculpture. Certain phases 
and certain examples of this production, especially from the 
fifth and sixth centuries, are often described as Byzantine 
art; but Byzantium, or, as it. was now called, Constantinople, 
did not attain a position of esthetic originality equal to that 
of such other oriental cities as Alexandria and Antioch until 
the sixth century. It was only later, when the energy was 
crushed out of these capitals by the Mohammedan conquest, 
that Byzantium acquired an ascendancy. The customary 
phraseology assigns the name of the First Golden Age to 
Byzantine art of the fifth and sixth centuries, culminating in 
the brilliant reign of Justinian; but since, at least in sculpture, 
even during this period, Egypt, Syria, and Anatolia were more 
productive than Constantinople, it is perhaps wiser to apply 
the term Byzantine sculpture only to the works of the later 
period, the so-called Second Golden Age, and to group the 
whole earlier output together under the designation of Early 
Christian. The national decline of the seventh century put a 
quietus upon art in Byzantium. The iconoclastic disturb- 
ances of the eighth and early ninth centuries might have been 
expected to complete the devastation; but although for a time 
the representation of sacred figures and scenes was tabooed 
and in strictly Byzantine territory large sculpture in the 
round was permanently suppressed, the net result, curiously 
enough, was a reaction to a kind of Renaissance, which, 

169 


170 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


beginning at the end of the ninth century and extending 
to the establishment of a Latin dynasty at Constantinople in 
1204, is known as the Second Golden Age. 

Rome and western Christendom, during the Early Chris- 
tian period, were not hearths of original «esthetic enterprise, 
but rather markets for the patronage and imitation of the 
art that flourished in the great Christian cities of the near 
Orient. Ravenna, particularly, which usurped the place of 
Rome as the seat of government for Italy in the fifth and 
sixth centuries, gave an enthusiastic welcome to the new 
Christian art that had been evolved in the East. The 
seventh and eighth centuries in the West, when out of the 
anarchy resulting from the disintegration of the Roman em- 
pire there were slowly emerging the beginnings of the modern 
nations, may be broadly defined as an Age of Barbarism in 
sculpture. The impetus given to art and letters by Charle- 
magne, in an attempt to revive something of the lost glory of 
Rome, has bestowed upon the ninth century the title of the 
Carolingian Renaissance. The Carolingian dynasty soon de- 
cayed, but Germany remained united and rose to a com- 
manding position. She preserved Carolingian culture through 
the tenth century, particularly under the members of the 
Saxon dynasty, Otho I, the Great, his two successors of the 
same name, and, at the beginning of the eleventh century, 
Henry II, the Saint. 


Il. EARLY CHRISTIAN SCULPTURE 


The origins and nature of Early Christian art. The adher- 
ents of the new religion simply took the existing Hellenistic + 
art and adapted it to their own purposes. The greatest cen- 
tres of production, during the period in question, were 
Alexandria in Egypt, Antioch in Syria, Palestine, and Asia 
Minor, and all Early Christian art was profoundly influenced 
by the styles there evolved. The local esthetic tendencies 
now impressed themselves upon the Hellenistic style in these 


*In this and subsequent chapters, the term “Hellenistic” is used in 
its broader sense (cf. p. 128) to cover all the periods of artistic pro- 
duction in Greek and Roman territory after the death of Alexander. 


SCULPTURE OF FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 171 


districts even more strongly than in the days of paganism. 
Moreover, certain traits and elements, especially decorative 
motifs, were introduced from the Hellenistic centres of the 
far Asiatic hinterland—from Mesopotamia and from. the 
district which is now modern Persia and which some critics 
believe to have been the birthplace of the world’s art. 
Constantinople was not yet so original a centre for sculpture. 
It served as a melting-pot in which the Alexandrian, Syrian, 
and Anatolian influences, pouring in through the channels of 
commerce and monasticism, were fused with what remained 
of the ancient Greek feeling for well-defined form; and a 
certain number of works were produced in the capital in this 
composite style. As far as it can be said to have had a 
separate artistic existence, Constantinople revealed a ten- 
dency towards realism, and naturally also, as the residence 
of the imperial and other noble families, developed a school 
of portraiture. Although, while the civilization was stil! 
pagan, especially during the early empire, an essentially Ro- 
man manner.appears to have been evolved as a subdivision 
of Hellenistic art, the numerous monuments of Early Chris- 
tian sculpture found at Rome reveal few, if any, qualities that 
can be labelled as distinctly Roman, and during this whole 
period the eternal city merely imported or imitated the exam- 
ples that were produced in Africa and Asia. In the great cen- 
tres of Hellenistic civilization, Alexandria, Antioch, and the 
cities of Anatolia, much of the heritage from ancient Greek 
art, especially the old Hellenic respect for the human body 
as a plastic vehicle, lived on at first in the art of the Chris- 
tians. Alexandria had stood in pagan art for what is called the 
picturesque style, characterized by an emphasis upon episodic 
scenes and pretty or naturalistic detail. The love of genre 
persisted here in Christian times, but gave way somewhat, 
under an augmented influence of the Orient and a more pro- 
nounced manifestation of indigenous Egyptian proclivities, 
both to monumentality and to an interest in narrative or sa- 
ered history. It was Syria and Palestine that played the 
most important réle in fixing the ultimate iconography of 
Early Christian art. The Syrian capital, Antioch, seems at 
first to have clung to the more purely Hellenic tradition, but 


172 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


its art must. soon have been affected by the esthetic develop- 
ments in the rest of the province. In this section of the 
Mediterranean basin, which began to assume a great impor- 
tance in Christian art by the middle of the fourth century, 
the Semitic strain tended to diminish the Hellenic sense of 
beauty of form and to elongate the sacred personages into 
eastern ascetics; the compositions were more solemnly 
ritualistic, and at the same time there was a greater emotional 
content than elsewhere (cf. Fig. 97). Geographically open to 
influences from Mesopotamia and the farther East, the 
Syrian style felt sculpture in the mode of painting and was 
inclined to reduce the high and round relief in which the 
Greeks had worked to a single plane of flat design. With an 
oriental opulence of taste, it indulged in an almost complete 
investiture of the given area with luxuriant ornamentation, 
and evolved a wealth of decorative motifs, among which the 
animals, real or monstrous, often confronting each other in 
pairs, are again certainly derived from the eastern hinterland 
(cf. Fig. 98). 

Not only did the Christians take over the Hellenistic style, 
but they often included even pagan subjects within their icon- 
ographical repertoire, giving them usually a new symbolical 
meaning. The constantly recurring figure of the Good Shep- 
herd is probably not a Christian adaptation of Hermes the 
Ram-bearer; the bucolic themes of Alexandrian art and liter- 
ature were simply imported into the Christian system and in- 
terpreted as representations of the joys of the after-life, 
and the shepherd with his flock became a symbol of Our 
Lord, the kindly keeper of Paradise. The fisherman, stand- 
ing for Christ, the fisher of men, is hkewise a translation from 
the piscatory genre of Alexandria. ‘The Hellenistic vintage 
scenes from the cycle of the seasons were employed probably 
at. first without any very definite symbolism, and the ideas 
of the analogy of the changes in the seasons to the fluctuations 
of human life and to the resurrection of the dead may have 
been merely after-thoughts. 

Sarcophagi in the Alexandrian style. The most numerous 
relics of Early Christian sculpture are the sarcophagi, the 
treatment of which was suggested by the Hellenistic pagan 


SCULPTURE OF FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 173 


examples. Except at Ravenna, normally only the front and 
sides of the sarcophagus were adorned with carvings,! and 
even the sides were executed with less care. Since the sculp- 
tors were still close to the tradition of ancient art, until the 
middle of the fourth century the forms and draperies retained 
much classical grace and dignity, and the nude was treated 
with correctness and even beauty. The earliest type, the first 
specimens of which appeared perhaps in the second and 
surely in the third century, is unmistakably of Alexandrian 
provenience, though the examples have been found in Italy 
and southern France. The subjects, disposed in a single row, 
were, like the early paintings of the catacombs, chiefly sym- 


FIG. 94—SARCOPHAGUS, NO. 183. LATERAN MUSEUM, ROME. (PHOTO. 
ANDERSON ) 


bolical, consisting of such themes as the Good Shepherd, the 
fisherman, and, to embody the idea of prayer and of the be- 
atified praying soul after death, the Orans, a woman or man 
with hands uplifted in supplication. The later Alexandrian 
sarcophagi admitted also the scenes from the Old and New 
Testaments that were becoming popular. The two best 
known specimens in the Alexandrian style were executed at 
a somewhat later period, the former probably in the fourth 
century: the Jonah sarcophagus of the Lateran Museum, 
Rome, in which the gamut of decoration has been extended 
to include a second row, and, in addition to pastoral and 
piscatory symbolism, scenes from the Old and New Testa- 
ments, and the episodes are bound together by pictorial 


Cin. 164, 


174 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


effects of landscape; and sarcophagus no. 183 of the same 
collection (Fig. 94), on which three figures of the Good Shep- 
herd are set against a design of amorinz engaged in the vin- 
tage. In a subdivision of the Alexandrian class, isolated sub- 
jects at the centre and ends are separated by a repeated 
motif of undulating strigils. The Vatican possesses two ex- 
amples of grander porphyry sarcophagi from the fourth cen- 
tury, the monument of Constantia, the daughter of Constan- 
tine, embellished with another vintage scene, and the prob- 
able monument of his mother, St. Helen, adorned in a better 
style with a piece of Alexandrian narrative, a victory of 
Romans over barbarians. 


FIG. 95—JUNIUS BASSUS SARCOPHAGUS. GROTTE VATICANE, ROME 


Sarcophagi in the style of the near Orient. In another ex- 
tensive class of sarcophagi, which are found throughout the 
Mediterranean basin, but particularly at Rome and in south- 
ern France, and which reached the height of their develop- 
ment in the fourth century, the symbolical repertoire is 
largely or wholly replaced by scenes from the Old and New 
Testaments, by ceremonial representations of Christ, and by 
the martyrdoms of the Apostles. A first subdivision of this 
class (Fig. 95) presents the scenes in an arcade of architec- 
tural niches, a motif which is probably to be ascribed to the 
use of an arcade on the pagan prototypes to represent the 


SCULPTURE OF FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 175 


palace of Hades; in the second, they are not separated but 
merge confusedly into one another.'' The episodes from the 
Old and New Testaments on the latter group are almost con- 
fined to miracles of healing, of divine assistance, and rescue 
from death, and their presence in this sepulchral art, as in 
the case of similar themes in the catacombs, is probably due 
to the fact that in liturgical prayers, especially for departing 
souls, reference was made to these earlier celebrated exam- 
ples of God’s mercy; it is just possible that some of the 
scenes were conceived as symbols of the Eucharist. In the 
arcaded group, other episodes from the Old and New Testa- 
ments, especially from the passion of Christ, without any 
evident symbolism or relation to the liturgy, very much en- 
ceroached upon the scenes typifying God’s loving-kindness. 
Martyrdoms and events from the life of St. Peter were also 
introduced. Furthermore, Our Lord often stands in the 
middle, receiving the deceased, handing the Gospel, the new 
Law, to St. Peter or St. Paul in the subject called Traditio 
legis, cr constituting the principal figure in some similar re- 
presentation such as the Second Coming. It was here also that 
for the first time the bearded Syrian Christ sometimes ap- 
peared in place of the more essentially Hellenistic beardless 
Christ. Occasionally the new themes intruded even into the 
unarcaded type. Some of the themes from the Old Testa- 
ment, when once established, were given a fresh symbolism 
as antitypes of the events of the Christian dispensation, the 
translation of Elijah, for instance, prefiguring the Ascension. 
The large addition of themes, many of which were to pass 
into the later iconography of Christian art, was chiefly of 
Syrian-Palestinian provenience, and the whole class of ar- 
caded sarcophagi may now definitely be denominated as a 
type that was evolved in or near this region. The other sub- 
division, probably but less certainly, entered the West from 
the same source. In both groups, the carvings may be dis- 
posed in one or two bands, but there is some reason for be- 


*This treatment of the scenes was probably suggested by the “con- 
tinuous method of narration” on the pagan sarcophagi (cf. pp. 23, 159, 
and 165); but on the Christian examples the episodes represented 
next to one another are often not drawn from the same story. 


176 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


lieving that. in the unarcaded group the examples with two 
zones, containing large portrait busts of the deceased at the 
centre, were produced by a local Roman workshop with 


FIG. S§6—SARCOPHAGUS. LATERAN MUSEUM, ROME. (PHOTO. ANDERSON) 


reminiscences of the Syrian-Palestinian manner (Fig. 96). 
The sarcophagi of this Roman stamp belong generally to a 
slightly later period, stretching into the fifth century, and, 


FIG. 97—SARCOPHAGUS. MUSEUM, RAVENNA 


like the ultimate specimens of the other types, are likely 
to betray signs of decadence, such as a confusion of Alex- 
andrian and Syrian-Palestinian iconography, defective pro- 
portions, awkward poses, and slovenly technique, especially a 


SCULPTURE OF FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 177 


tendency to render folds of drapery merely by drilled lines. 
Inasmuch as many, possibly the majority, of the other 
sarcophagi at Rome were executed by local craftsmen work- 
ing in the various foreign styles, now and then one may 
perhaps discern even in examples of these Alexandrian and 
Syrian types intimations of those qualities that have come 
to be associated with the Roman name, a strong feeling for 
the human form in three dimensions and a predilection for 
stockiness and solemnity. 


FIG. 9JS—SARCOPHAGUS OF ST. THEODORUS. S. APOLLINARE IN CLASSE, 
RAVENNA 


Sarcophagi at Ravenna. Partly for stylistic reasons and 
partly because the material is marble from the island of Pro- 
connesus in the Propontis, it is now thought that the im- 
portant group of sarcophagi at Ravenna, dating chiefly from 
the fifth century, constitute a type that was developed at 
Constantinople under strong Anatolian and Syrian influences, 
some of them manufactured at the Byzantine capital itself, 
others executed at Ravenna in the imported stone by foreign 
or local sculptors. Two of the classes that have been consid- 
ered are found also here. The arcaded class, in this instance, 


178 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


may be based upon Anatolian precedent; the class with the 
unbroken plane of relief, which eventually very much tended 
to supplant the other, is thoroughly Syrian. In many respects, 
however, the sarcophagi at Ravenna differ considerably from 
the Roman and southern French examples. There is usually 
a rounded, though occasionally a gabled, lid, and the carv- 
ings are arranged in a single zone. The composition is not 
so crowded, and the front contains only a single scene con- 
sisting of a few figures. The most frequent scene, often framed 
between two oriental palm-trees, is Christ exalted and sur- 
rounded by saints in such iconographical themes as the recep- 
tion of the martyrs’ wreaths or the ritualistic Syrian composi- 
tion of the Traditio legis (Fig. 97). The episodes from Holy 
Writ, whether symbolical or merely narrative, are rare, being 
confined chiefly to the decoration of the end-pieces. Some- 
times, particularly in the 
later period, Christian em- 
blems and _ foliage, in 
formal and often very 
beautiful designs, were 
substituted for the fig- 
ures; the symbolical pea- 
cocks, signifying 1mmor- 
tality, and the lambs 
were especially popular 
(Fig. 98). The weaker 
modelling of the forms, 
the lesser grace of the 
draperies, the more care- 
ful symmetry of the de- 
sign, and the conception of 
the space as an opportu- 
nity for decoration com- 
FIG. 99—THE GooD SHEPHERD. LATERAN bine with other character- 
MUSEUM, ROME istics that have been 
mentioned to give the 
sarcophagi of Ravenna an even more tangible oriental cast 
than is discernible in the examples found in France and the 
rest of Italy. 


SCULPTURE OF FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 179 


Other Christian sarcophagt. Here and there along the 
shores of the Mediterranean sarcophagi have been preserved 
which exhibit slight local variations from the types already 
considered. ‘The later specimens reveal the presence of the 
invading barbaric races in a greater rudeness of technique and 
in the new decorative motifs that they brought with them. 


FIG. 100—SCENES FROM LIFE OF JOSEPH, THRONE OF MAXIMIAN. ARCHI- 
EPISCOPAL PALACE, RAVENNA. (PHOTO, ALINARI) 


Other Early Christian sculpture. The type of the Good 
Shepherd was taken from the sarcophagi and repeated in the 
round. Of some ten extant examples, the figure in the Lat- 
eran Museum, with a pouch slung at the side of the body 
(Fig. 99), still retains, in the middle of the third century, 
much noble ancient feeling. The old classical tradition of 
portraiture persisted, though with a certain rudeness of tech- 


180 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


nique; the most familiar instance is the colossal and power- 
ful bronze of an emperor, perhaps Theodosius the Great, dat- 
ing probably from the fifth century, at Barletta in Apulia. 
At the same time, the Syrian-Palestinian influence manifested 
itself in its loveliest form in the carvings of the wooden doors 
of S. Sabina at Rome. If the study of the minor arts fell 
within the scope of this book, we should perhaps find the 
qualities of the Early Christian epoch better illustrated by 
the small ivories than by sculpture in the large. One work in 
ivory, at least, must be mentioned, because it intrudes upon 
the sphere of more monumental sculpture, the so-called throne 
of the Archbishop Maximian in the Archiepiscopal Palace at 
Ravenna (Fig. 100). The partisans of an ascription to the 
region of Antioch adduce as proofs the types of the person- 
ages and the ornamentation in incised technique with con- 
fronted beasts amidst the richest leafage. The partisans of 
Alexandria stress the presence of the popular Egyptian saint, 
the Baptist, the predilection for the story of Joseph, and the 
love of the picturesque in the perspective of landscape and 
buildings. The truth may very well le between the two ex- 
tremes of opinion: since stylistic elements were always circu- 
lating from one country to another, the throne may have been 
carved by Alexandrian hands under Syrian influence. 


Ill. BYZANTINE SCULPTURE 


General characteristics. We have already seen that, in 
the history of sculpture, the term “Byzantine” may very 
properly be restricted to the production of the Second Golden 
Age. The attack upon icons at first naturally diverted energy 
into secular art, for models of which it was necessary to look 
to antiquity. The study of ancient Greek art was thus re- 
newed, and at the same time there was a fresh importation of 
influences from the East. A revived interest in historical 
themes brought with it the desire for the realism and es- 
pecially the portraiture of Hellenistic Alexandria. Religious 
art shared for a time the salutary antiquarianism and the 
vigorous realism of the secular movement; but finally deriv- 
ing, like the modern French church, increased enthusiasm 


SCULPTURE OF FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 181 


from the past persecution, it became in the eleventh century 
more hieratic than ever before, and, considering it a sacred 
duty to repeat again and again the forms and compositions 
that had been proscribed, ended eventually in a paralysis of 
theological conventionalism. The most disastrous effect of 
orientalism was to provoke a distaste for monumental sculp- 
ture in the round and for bold relief, so that by the end of the 
First Golden Age they had 
become almost extinct. 
Other influences made for 
the same end, especially the 
increasing disfavor with 
which the Church, partly 
because of its Hebraic deri- 
vation, looked upon “graven 
images,” the forms in which 
paganism had chiefly 
clothed its false gods. Only 
a few low reliefs are left 
to represent what little 
sculpture in the large was 
produced in the Second 
Golden Age, and it is abso- 
lutely necessary for us to 
turn to the ivories in order 
to get our ideas of Byzan- 
tine plastic characteristics. 

FIG. 101—cRUCIFIXION. METROPOLITAN 


Originally colored and MUSEUM, NEW YORK. (COURTESY OF 
gilded, and thus regarded THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM) 


as a species of embossed 

painting, they did not shock Byzantine religious sensibilities, 
and often indeed in composition and form were based upon 
contemporary miniatures. 

The ivories. It was the ecclesiastical school of the Second 
rather than of the First Golden Age that evolved those quali- 
ties ordinarily connoted by the phrase “Byzantine art.” They 
may be studied in their loveliest and fullest development, with 
the shortcomings as yet only foreshadowed, in a group of 
ivories of the tenth and eleventh centuries related in style 


182 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


and in uniform excellence. This group is conveniently re- 
presented for us in America by a Crucifixion in the Metro- 
politan Museum (Fig. 101). The holy personages have a 
reserved dignity, not yet frozen into the stiffness of the de- 
cline. The postures are studied from nature and have not be- 
come mere reiterations of others’ achievements; they do not 
possess the rigid monotony of a century or two later. The 
draperies, although they are approximating the ordinary 
Byzantine type with minute, multiplied, and parallel folds, 
retain much classical nobility and grace. However deficient 
in originality, however narrow and stereotyped through sub- 
jection to theological prescription, the best Byzantine art 
was always redeemed by the exquisite fineness of technical 
detail that distinguishes this Crucifixion. The tradition of 
skilful execution was gradually to be forgotten, the extremi- 
ties particularly were to lose correctness of proportion, and 
the bodies were to suffer an excessive elongation and ema- 
ciation which the Virgin of the Crucifixion already fore- 
shadows. 

Sculpture proper. Our knowledge of the scanty output of 
Byzantium in larger sculpture during the Second Golden Age 
is confined to a few religious, mythological, or purely dec- 
orative reliefs preserved chiefly in the walls of St. Mark’s, 
Venice, and in the near-lying cathedral of Torcello. The re- 
lief has sunk to a flatness in which the line of demarcation 
from actual painting is hardly visible. The reliefs of sacred 
purport, indeed, are simply marble translations from Byzan- 
tine pictures. Those of mythological content are concrete 
symbols of the interest in secular themes at this time and of a 
partial Renaissance of antiquity. The decorative slabs that 
avoid the human figure, exported throughout the Mediter- 
ranean, rely upon the oriental mottfs of foliage, animals, and 
geometric designs. 


IV. Tue AGE oF BARBARISM 


From the seventh century until the rise of Romanesque art 
in the eleventh century, very little large sculpture was pro- 
duced in Europe. One of the reasons for the plastic collapse 


SCULPTURE OF FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 183 


was the potent influence, during these centuries, of the xs- 
thetic principles of the near Orient, where there was a grow- 
ing distaste for monumental carving. There are some isolated 


FIG. 102—BEWCASTLE CROSS. (FROM “THE DATE OF THE RUTHWELL AND 
BEWCASTLE CROSSES” BY A. S. COOK) 


examples of rather fine carving in pure design; but when the 
barbarians of the seventh and eighth centuries did have the 
temerity to attempt figure sculpture, the results usually re- 
sembled the mere groping of children. The disagreement of 
the learned pundits upon the question of dating does not 


184 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


permit us as yet to decide whether in Italy and Great Britain, 
because of a more pronounced dependence upon the Early 
Christian models of the East, there were sporadic exceptions 
to this general debasement. The stucco figures upon the 
canopy over the altar of S. Ambrogio, Milan, for instance, 
and the feminine saints of the same material above the door 
of S. Maria in Valle, Cividale, have been assigned by some 
critics to the ninth and eighth centuries respectively; by 
others, owing to the advanced technical knowledge, they have 
been relegated to the end of the Romanesque period. The 
same chronological dispute exists in regard to a group of 
British fragments in Northumbria, chiefly two great stone 
crosses at Bewcastle (Fig. 102) and Ruthwell. One camp 
of scholars champions a dating in the twelfth century; the 
other camp connects the monuments with St. Wilfrid’s 
evangelization of the province in the seventh century and 
explains the correctness in the rendering of the human form 
by a British knowledge of Early Christian models, towards 
which the eastern character of much of the ornament also 
points. Pieces of similar High Crosses, as they are called, 
and of analogous carving on grave-stones exist, indeed, in 
Armenia, but the relationship, if relationship there be, has 
not yet been thoroughly studied. In any case, the Northum- 
brian development may have been much indebted to the con- 
temporary art of Ireland, which was compounded of elements 
drawn from the Christian East, and, especially in ornament, 
from the rude esthetic inheritance of the Celts. The most 
conspicuous Irish product was the illumination of manu- 
scripts, but there was also much excellent work in metal and 
stone. Since, however, it does not appear possible to ascribe 
the extant stone crosses in Ireland, such as that of Muredach 
at Monasterboice, to a date before the tenth century, the 
English and Scottish specimens, if placed in the seventh cen- 
tury, may have set the precedent for the sister island, or they 
may be considered to be derived from early Irish examples 
that have perished. 


SCULPTURE OF FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 185 


V. THE CAROLINGIAN RENAISSANCE 


If, as the chroniclers and poets declare, the partial revival 
of esthetic interest under Charlemagne and his successors in 
the ninth and tenth centuries expressed itself in any monu- 
mental pieces of sculpture, at least no examples of significance 
are preserved that can with certainty be assigned to this 
period, and we must rely for our conceptions upon the minor 
arts of ivory and bronze. The coalition of so large a part 
of Europe under the single sceptre of Charlemagne created in 
all kinds of art a general and international style. Recent 
authorities distinguish national schools and local tendencies 
within the unified style, but this criticism has not as yet 
attained anything like final results. The east-Christian in- 
fluence was still potent, especially in ornamental detail; and 
the renewed emphasis upon Roman antiquity, which was the 
mainspring of all forms of cultural activity during this epoch, 
was bound to turn the eyes of sculptors with fresh enthusi- 
asm to the ancient remains and to the Early Christian adap- 
tations of the Hellenistic style. For direct models, the sculp- 
tors of the Carolingian Renaissance naturally had recourse 
to the examples nearest at hand, the illuminations in manu- 
scripts, which then in the West had best preserved a tradi- 
tion for the delineation of the human form and the style of 
which was evolved from east-Christian prototypes and from 
a separate western tradition that had been gradually unfold- 
ing in Europe. It was perhaps from models in Anglo-Saxon 
manuscripts that the masters of ivory and bronze derived 
the bent and slightly contorted bodies which they represented, 
and it was possibly under east-Christian influence that they 
tended to make them rather slim. The process of bronze- 
casting was understood throughout the Carolingian Renais- 
sance, especially in Germany. The indebtedness of sculpture 
to painting has never been more pronounced. The most start- 
ling parallelism is found in the ivory covers for psalters, 
which illustrate very literally and naively the verses of the 
psalms. The stock example is the cover for the Psalter of 
Charles the Bald, now in the Bibliothéque Nationale at Paris 


186 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


(Fig. 103), on which the figures of speech in the fifty-seventh 
psalm are reduced to matters of fact, copied exactly from the 
miniatures of well-known psalters at Utrecht and in the Ox- 
ford Library. A celebrated specimen of the goldsmith’s work 
is the casing or paliotto for the altar of S. Ambrogio at Milan, 


FIG. 103—COVER OF PSALTER OF CHARLES THE BALD. BIBLIOTHEQUE NA- 
TIONALE, PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 


ordered in 835 by the Archbishop Angilbertus II from a cer- 
tain Wolvinius. 

Germany. It was, however, in Germany that the sculpture 
of the Carolingian Renaissance attained its most effective 
and individual expression. A more correct appellation, per- 
haps, would be the Renaissance of the Othos; but the plastic 
style was a continuation and development from the models 
evolved under Charlemagne. One of the great centres of 
activity was Hildesheim during the episcopate of St. Bern- 


SCULPTURE OF FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 187 


FIG. 104—BRONZE DOORS, CATHEDRAL, HILDESHEIM. (PHOTO. NEUE PHOTO- 
GRAPHISCHE GESELLSCHAFT, STEGLITZ) 


188 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


ward (993-1022). Certain critics have sought to explain this 
Teutonic superiority by the supposed intrusion of many 
Greek craftsmen in the train of the Byzantine princess, Theo- 
phano, the wife of Otho II. Some of the monuments indeed 
are very eastern in their feeling, notably the technically pre- 
eminent but rather uninspired bronze Easter column, with 
scenes from the Gospels, in the cathedral of Hildesheim, said 
to have been set up by St. Bernward and imitated from the 
non-extant, metal paschal candle-sticks of Roman churches 
or from the column of Trajan or similar, destroyed columns 
at Constantinople. But the nature and the number of these 
Byzantine artists are hypothetical, and the best and most 
typical productions of the period, such as the bronze doors 
of Hildesheim cathedral, executed under the patronage of St. 
Bernward (Fig. 104), are far removed from the conventionali- 
ties of the East. The Renaissance of the Othos is permeated 
by a crude but powerful realism, striking already that popu- — 
lar note which has given the distinctive tone to German 
art from first to last. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


One of the earliest general works on Early Christian and 
Byzantine art composed according to the principles of modern 
scholarship was the first volume of F. X. Kraus’s Geschichte der 
christlichen Kunst, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1896. The treatment 
of these subjects in A. Michel’s Histoire de lart, vol. I, pt. I, 
1905, by André Pératé and Gabriel Millet has not been so far 
superseded as to have lost its value. Since a large proportion of 
the objects of art mentioned in the present chapter are in Italy, 
the first two volumes of A. Venturi’s Storia dellarte italiana, 
1901 and 1902, covering the whole Pre-Romanesque period, are 
indispensable to the student who wishes to pursue the subject 
further. The celebrated Austrian scholar, J. Strzygowski, has 
the honor of having definitely established the essentially eastern 
character of Early Christian and Byzantine art; though dis- 
cursive in their nature and not averse to merely tentative 
theories, the following works by him constitute an epoch-making 
series: Orient oder Rom, Leipzig, 1901; Hellas in des Orients 
Umarmung, Munich, 1902; Hellenistische und koptische Kunst 


SCULPTURE OF FIRST MILLENNIUM A.D. 189 


in Alexandria, Vienna, 1902; Kleinasien, ein Neuland der Kunst- 
geschichte, Leipzig, 1903; and Ursprung der christlichen Kirch- 
enkunst, Leipzig, 1920. Walter Lowrie’s Monuments of the Early 
Church, 1901, is a small, rather popular, but accurate manual. 
More recent general books on the Early Christian and Byzantine 
periods, written with all the knowledge and resources at the 
command of the critic of the present day, are ©. Diehl’s orderly 
Manuel dart byzantin, Paris, 1910, and O. M. Dalton’s somewhat 
desultory but important Byzantine Art and Archeology, Oxford, 
1911. The latest discoveries and hypotheses are clearly and 
interestingly set forth in Oskar Wulfi’s Altchristliche und byzan- 
tinische Kunst, in two volumes, Berlin, 1914 and 1918. Special 
works on the sarcophagi outside of Italy are E. Le Blant’s Htude 
sur les sarcophages chrétiens antiques de la ville d’ Arles, Paris, 
1878, and Les sarcophages chréttens de la Gaule, Paris, 1886, and 
José Ramén Mélida’s La escultura hispanocristiana, Madrid, 
1908. 

In addition to Venturi, the chapters in pts. I and II of vol. I 
of Michel’s Histoire by E. Bertaux, E. Molinier, and J. J. Mar- 
quet de Vasselot provide a satisfactory treatment of the sculpture 
of the Barbaric and Carolingian epochs. FE. Molinier has also 
written a great work on the Histoire générale des arts appliqués 
a Vindustrie, Paris, two volumes of which are older but not anti- 
quated discussions of these periods, one on the Ivoires, 1896, and 
the other on L’orfévrerie, 1900. The English and Irish Crosses 
may be studied in Margaret Stokes’s Harly Christian Art in 
Ireland, Dublin, 1911, in the definitive work on British sculpture 
of the Middle Ages, Medieval Figure-Sculpture in England, by 
E. S. Prior and A. Gardner, Cambridge, England, 1912, but above 
all in G. Baldwin Brown’s The Arts in Early England, The 
Ruthwell and Bewcastle Crosses, etc., London, 1921. The chief 
American protagonist of the later dating of the Crosses is 
Professor A. S. Cook in The Date of the Ruthwell and Bewcastle 
Crosses, Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and 
Sciences, XVII (1912-1913), pp. 217-361. Further knowledge 
of the Renaissance of the Othos may be obtained from the gen- 
eral works on medizval German sculpture mentioned at the end 
of the next chapter. The student who wishes to learn what has 
at the present been discovered about Armenian sculpture should 
turn to J. Strzygowski’s Die Bauwkunst der Armenier und Europa, 
Vienna, 1918. 


CHAPTERS 
THE MIDDLE AGES 
I. INTRODUCTION 


Classification. For the purposes of this book, the Middle 
Ages may be taken to extend from the eleventh through the 
fifteenth century, except in Italy, where the Renaissance is 
usually considered to have been inaugurated at least as early 
as 1400. In the eleventh and twelfth centuries the field of art 
was occupied by the style called the Romanesque; but the 
first signs of Gothic began to show themselves in the French 
- province called the Ile-de-France by the middle of the latter 
century and elsewhere by the end of the century. The de- 
veloped Gothic style, undergoing successive modifications in 
its evolution, flourished throughout the greater part of Europe 
from 1200 to 1500 and in places lasted on during the ear- 
lier sixteenth century. The heart of medizeval Europe was 
France, and French institutions, customs, manners, schools, 
literature, and art were the patterns for the rest of the 
Christian world. 

Religion. The strongest motive force in medieval art 
was religion. The robust, sincere, fervid, and concrete faith 
that remained in unimpaired soundness at least until the 
fourteenth century made it the greatest essentially Christian 
art that the world has produced. The vigor of Christianity 
overflowed into many channels. Monasticism swelled to 
colossal proportions, and the monasteries continued to be the 
chief patrons of art until the end of the Romanesque period. 
The ebb of Benedictinism was stemmed by many Reforms of 
the Order. The first, that of Cluny in Burgundy, founded in 
910, became so powerful that it was one of the chief agents 
in the dissemination of the Romanesque style. The be- 

190 


THE MIDDLE AGES 191 


ginning of the noblest century of the Middle Ages, the thir- 
teenth, was marked by the appearance of the two great 
mendicant orders of the Franciscans and Dominicans. The 
former, through the life and precepts of its founder, even- 
tually helped in the fifteenth century to achieve the human- 
ization of art and a more appreciative study of nature. An- 
other beacon light of the thirteenth century was the typically 
Christian philosophy of scholasticism, which then shone 
brightest with such famous names as St. Thomas Aquinas, 
Duns Scotus, and Albertus Magnus. An exact parallel to its 
categorical subtleties is found in the elaborate iconographical 
arrangements of sculpture and stained glass in the early 
Gothic churches. The cult of the Virgin was much em- 
phasized and became a vital and altogether lovely aspect of 
medieval art. The Crusades, vxtending from the end of the 
eleventh to the end of the thirteenth century, were not wholly 
political and economic in their aims, as some prejudiced his- 
torians would have us believe, but they were also a sincere 
expression of religious enthusiasm. Incidentally, they fos- 
tered commerce between the East and West, especially for 
Genoa, Pisa, and Venice, and the closer contact with the pro- 
ductions of Byzantium and the near Orient contributed to 
the flowering of Romanesque art. 

The pilgrimages. A final factor in medieval religion, 
the significance of which for literature and art can hardly 
be overestimated, was the popularity of the pilgrimages to 
Rome, the Holy Land, and especially to the shrine of St. 
James (Santiago) at Compostela in Spain. The churches and 
hospitable monasteries on the highways to Rome and Jerusa- 
lem and on the several European routes to Compostela, the 
so-called “Way of St. James,” were bound to take on unusual 
splendor of architecture and decoration kecause of the 
wealth that accrued to them through the pious _benefi- 
cence of pilgrims and because they wished proudly to ex- 
hibit to their visitors a real magnificence. The Order of 
Cluny, furthermore, realizing and seizing upon the advantage 
of possessing holdings all along the Way, propagated by these 
roads its enthusiasm for sculpture as a mode of ecclesiastical 
embellishment. The pilgrimages also provided routes by 


192 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


which artistic influences could readily travel from one place 
and even from one country to another, and the monuments 
along these arteries often tended to assume a similarity in 
certain details or even occasionally in general style. In par- 
ticular, an acquaintance with the art of the near Orient was 
acquired through the pilgrimages to the Holy Land. 

Methods of medieval sculptors. Throughout the Middle 
Ages the same man was very often both architect and sculp- 
tor, but a large number of the craftsmen must have special- 
ized in sculpture. ‘Authorities are not agreed as to whether 
in the Romanesque period it was the more general custom 
to carve the stones before or after they were set into the 
edifice. Perhaps there was no established rule; but if one 
practice did prevail and if this practice was to do the stone- 
cutting upon the building itself, it would have provided an 
additional reason for the Romanesque conception of sculp- 
ture as only a part of the architectural scheme. In any case, 
the general Gothic custom, although there were many ex- 
ceptions especially in the later Middle Ages, was to carve 
the sculpture before putting it in place. The natural results 
were, on the one hand, ever increasing correctness and fine- 
ness of detail, and, on the other, the constantly developing 
tendency, which culminated in the fourteenth and fifteenth 
centuries, to make the figure stand forth from the background 
and to treat it as a separate object. Romanesque art did not 
afford much opportunity for stone statues detached from the 
body of the building. When their use was developed in the 
Gothic period, either for architectural embellishment or as 
completely isolated objects of devotion, the normal procedure, 
again with many exceptions, was to hew all parts of a figure 
from a single block. This method of working, by restricting 
the amount of agitation and consequent projection of mem- 
bers, constituted a contributory cause for the repose that 
distinguishes the sculpture of the thirteenth and fourteenth 
centuries. . 

Polychromy. In regard to the universal and much dis- 
cussed practice of painting sculpture in the Middle Ages, a 
certain number of facts seem now to be established. In the 
Romanesque period, in the thirteenth century, and, in the 


THE MIDDLE AGES 193 


majority of places, in the fourteenth, the tones were sub- 
dued, and the scheme of color was conventionalized. In 
order to avoid garish effects, gilding was admitted, except on 
bronzes, only very chastely and sparingly. It was used here 
and there for creating accents, as on a crown, a star, or a 
halo, and for making light and simple patterns over the 
garments. By conventionalization of polychromy it is meant 
that the colors and arrangements of colors were not chosen 
with the purpose of reproducing closely those observed in 
actuality but rather with the idea of obtaining agreeable 
decorative combinations. The fifteenth century brought with 
it some changes. The general realism of the period entailed 
a partial abandonment of conventionalization of color and a 
desire to approximate the appearances of nature. Flanders 
was already delighting in a gayer, not to say gaudier, system 
of color, and with the spread of Flemish fashions this less 
subdued tonality won a footing in the rest of Europe. In 
one respect the fondness of brilliancy gained a point even 
over realism, for it lavished gold over the figures in places 
where it was not to be found in actuality and with a pro- 
fusion that could not have been paralleled in contemporary 
life. Premonitions of this deterioration of taste occurred in 
certain regions in the fourteenth century, especially in the 
Low Countries and Spain. 


Il. RoOMANESQUE SCULPTURE 
A. INTRODUCTION 


The evolution of Romanesque sculpture. The Romanesque 
period witnessed the revival of monumental sculpture. The 
height of Romanesque plastic development may be placed 
at the end of the eleventh and in the first half of the 
twelfth century. The models from which the stone-cutters 
learned were chiefly the illuminations of east-Christian, 
Carolingian, and contemporary manuscripts. From them 
they adopted iconography and even such curious stylistic 
details as the clinging of garments closely to the body and 


194 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the use of concentric folds of drapery over chest and knees. 
To a lesser extent, they depended upon the other minor arts, 
such as the ivories, upon the relics of ancient statuary, par- 
ticularly the sarcophagi, and upon earlier or contemporary 
frescoes and mosaics. All these models, however, they put 
to such new uses and transfused with so new a spirit that 
Romanesque sculpture was virtually an original manifesta- 
tion. The dependence upon the miniatures, the other minor 
arts, and painting tended at first to result in low and flat 
relief and in a reproduction in stone of the designs and tech- 
nique of these prototypes, especially in a rendering of de- 
tail by incised lines; but sculpture gradually emancipated 
itself, began to comprehend its own aim of modelling in the 
round and in many planes, and sought to become self- 
sufficient. By a strange historical paradox, Romanesque 
sculpture began with the forms of an already highly de- 
veloped and sophisticated art, the art of the miniaturists; 
and its task was that of working towards simplicity and 
naturalness. It was not until the Gothic age that these 
ideals were fully realized. 

Subordination to architecture. The key to the interpre- 
tation and the charm of Romanesque sculpture is that, al- 
though it had recovered the ability to render forms correctly 
and naturalistically in the round, it always remained the 
hand-maid of architecture. The figures are conceived as parts 
of the general architectural system, and the separate groups 
are coerced into designs as formal as the curves of the vault- 
ing or as the plan of a portal. The shapes are consequently 
treated with a license that approximates them to the work 
of the Post-Impressionists, except that the distortions of the 
human form by our most recent artists are usually dissoci- 
ated from an architectural scheme. Human bodies are 
elongated by the Romanesque sculptor until at a short dis- 
tance they appear as much mere lines in the composition 
as do the colonnettes or the arches. The figures on capitals 
are arranged in patterns and twisted into forms required 
by the symmetry of the Corinthian norm, which was usually 
in the artist’s mind. The drapery is commonly pleated in 
long, narrow folds; and in places, in order to contrast with 


THE MIDDLE AGES 195 


the rigid architectural lines, its edges are thrown into arti- 
ficial and wind-blown spirals suggested by models in minia- 
tures. Often, indeed, for this same purpose of variation, 
the sculptors created with the figures, as well as with the 
drapery, elaborate curvilinear rather than rectilinear designs. 

Iconography. The subjects of Romanesque sculpture were 
drawn primarily from sacred history, legend, and symbolism. 
The iconography of the Old and New Testaments was pro- 
vided chiefly by the manuscripts, but the borrowings were 
often enlivened by an originality of adaptation. For the 
representation of the legends of post-Biblical saints the 
carvers were obliged to rely largely on their own ready in- 
vention. It is possible that the revival of ecclesiastical 
symbolism, after its lapse since the seventh century, was due, 
in considerable degree, to the great abbot of St. Denis in the 
second quarter of the twelfth century, Suger. The monu- 
ments, especially the portals, were often the objects of ex- 
tensive iconographical schemes, though by no means so 
elaborate as in a Gothic church. Favorite themes for Roman- 
esque tympana were the Apocalyptic Christ, the Last Judg- 
ment, and the Ascension. The carvings, however, also 
present a bewildering plenitude of profane material. The 
characteristic labors of the different months were frequently 
represented upon portals. The richest variety of themes is 
found in the capital (Fig. 105), and here particularly, in ad- 
dition to sacred matter, every sort of secular subject ob- 
truded itself. The panorama of medieval life is displayed 
before our eyes—its aristocrats and peasantry, its battles, 
trades, amusements, and romances. On the capitals and in 
other sections of the church the sculptor reveals also a pro- 
nounced taste for the forms of beasts. Sometimes these are 
the actors in Asopic fables, or they bring morals from the 
Bestiaries; but very commonly they are the fiercest animals 
and the most prodigious monsters, employed, with no sym- 
bolic significance, merely for a decorative purpose. Normal 
and abnormal beasts alike engage often in the most. sangui- 
nary combats. Much of this fantastic ensemble was the re- 
sult of an imitation of oriental fabrics and tapestries; but 
additional weird monstrosities were created by the imagina- 


196 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


tion of the Romanesque artists, reflecting their barbaric 
origins still bursting through the veneer of civilization. 
Preéminence of France. Southern France attained such a 
brilliant development in sculpture that to a very considerable 
extent she taught the rest of Europe. It should, however, be 
stated at once that there is a tendency in the most recent 
criticism to diminish the importance of France as a dis- 
seminating centre of the Romanesque sculptural style in 


FIG. 105—SPANISH ROMANESQUE CAPITALS. 1. §S. CUGAT DEL VALLES. 
STREET-ACROBATS. 2. CATHEDRAL OF TARRAGONA. ON ABACUS, FABLE OF THE 
CAT AND MICE 


favor, on the one hand, of Lombardy, and on the other, of 
the Way of St. James. Professor A. Kingsley Porter is the 
leading exponent of the idea that the Romanesque school 
which exercised the strongest and most widely spread influ- 
ence was neither French nor Spanish but attached to the 
Way of St. James in both countries and therefore inter- 
national. The writer of the present chapters, nevertheless, 
is inclined to believe that, however great the significance of 
the Way in fostering and spreading sculpture, the creative 
impulse and the original models, as in the case of the relation- 


THE MIDDLE AGES 197 


ship between Provencal and Catalonian literature, came from 
southern France. 


B. FRANCE 


Languedoc. The French school that was most comprehen- 
sive in its scope developed in Languedoc. It was possibly 
because of this comprehensiveness that the achievements of 
Languedoc had a greater vogue than those of any other 
province and furnished a considerable. share of the founda- 
tions upon which were built the mature Romanesque schools, 
not only in many sections, if not all, of France, but also in a 
large part of the rest of Europe. Even if the precedence be 
ultimately awarded by historians of art to the school of the 
Way of St. James, it can never be denied that the workshops 
of Languedoc were among the most important constituents of 
the international school. The broader scope of the school 
of Languedoc is exemplified by the fact that it includes two 
subdivisions partially differentiated from each other in style. 
Although the sculptors of both tendencies felt the carving 
architecturally, they cultivated liveliness to a greater or less 
degree and sought to avoid a too obvious stiffness by taking 
refuge in two peculiar mannerisms: the crossing of. the legs, 
an old motif in European esthetic tradition, probably de- 
rived in Romanesque sculpture from models in the minor 
arts; and the above-mentioned agitation of the edges of the 
garments in formal scrolls, suggested by similar flourishes 
in miniatures. The principal monuments of the first sub- 
division are great assemblies of sculpture on portals. The 
composition is given an architectural regularity and sym- 
metry, and the figures are arbitrarily thrown into exaggerated 
curves or drawn out into extravagant elongations in order 
that they may fit into the space and become like lines and 
masses of an architectural arrangement. Even the features 
have a more pronounced geometrical cast than in the other 
subdivision. The effort for vivacity and expressiveness is 
much more evident, the pleats of the drapery are fewer, and 
all the lines are sharper and deeper-cut, creating an effect of 
greater crispness. The supreme example of this first phase 


198 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


of the production of Languedoc is the portal of St. Pierre at 
Moissac (Fig. 106), variously dated from 1115 to 1150. Like 
the analogous portal in the interior of the church at Souillac, 
this doorway contains one of the piers that are characteristic 
of the region, built of conglomerations of beasts and human 
forms and perhaps derived from similar motifs in manu- 
scripts that were executed under oriental influences. The 
figures on the piers and the capitals in the cloister of Moissac 


FIG. 106—TYMPANUM, PORTAL OF ST. PIERRE, MOISSAC. (PHOTO. FROM 
A CAST) 


were carved at the very beginning of the twelfth century in a 
similar, though not identical, style. In the second subdivi- 
sion of the sculpture of Languedoc, which may be illustrated 
by a series of Apostles of about the year 1145 from a portal 
of the chapter-house of the church of St. Etienne, Toulouse, 
now in the Museum of the city (Fig. 107), the figures, in imi- 
tation of ancient sarcophagi or of the Christian ivories or per- 
haps again through suggestion from illuminations, are fre- 
quently disposed in niches, conversing with one another, and 


THE MIDDLE AGES 199 


their vivacity is curbed in order to accord with architectural 
solemnity. The masterpiece of this tendency, already af- 
fected by the embryonic Gothic movement of the north, is 
the Annunciation in the same Museum, executed in the last 
quarter of the twelfth century. 


FIG. 107—APOSTLES. MUSEUM, TOULOUSE 


Burgundy. In its predilection for extremely attenuated 
figures and in its bizarre conceptions, the school of Bur- 
gundy, which was at its height in the first half and middle of 
the twelfth century, outdid that subdivision of the school of 
Languedoc which is best represented by the portal of Moissac. 
Other distinguishing qualities are a great richness of orna- 
mental detail, a high degree of animation in forms and 
draperies, finding expression particularly in more violent 
swirls at the bottom of the garments than in Languedoc, 
and a powerfully developed dramatic sensibility. The most 
celebrated examples are: eight superb capitals from the choir 
of the great abbey of Cluny, now in the Museum of the town, 
dated variously from the end of the eleventh to the middle 
of the twelfth century; the portal that opens from the nar- 
thex into the church in the Cluniac abbey of Vézelay, the 
tympanum of which embodies the bestowal of the Holy Spirit 


200 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


at Pentecost; and the allied doorway of St. Lazare at Autun, 
which represents the Last Judgment and constitutes the most 
extravagant instance of Romanesque license in the manipula- 
tion of the human form (Fig. 108). The capitals from 
Moiitier-St. Jean in the Fogg Museum, Cambridge, make it 
possible for Americans to obtain an excellent idea of the 
Burgundian manner even in their own country. In the third 


FIG. 1O8—TYMPANUM, PORTAL OF ST. LAZARE, AUTUN. (PHOTO. FROM 
A CAST) 


decade of the twelfth century, the style of this province vied 
with that of Languedoc in influence upon other parts of 
Europe. 

Provence. ‘The presence of a greater number of antiques 
in what had been for a time the most flourishing province of 
the Roman empire made it natural that its school should re- 
tain the old characteristics. The school of Provence was 
also invigorated by contact with the youthful school of 
Chartres.1 The facade of St. Trophime at Arles, executed in 


* Cf. p. 226. 


THE MIDDLE AGES 201 


the third or even the fourth quarter of the twelfth century, 
is typical (Fig. 109). The heritage from antiquity may best 
be discerned in the larger figures of saints in niches—bodies 
of squatty proportions, heads of an inordinate magnitude 
and stolid expression, classical draperies, an absence of the 
technical delicacy that distinguishes the carvings of Lan- 
guedoc and Burgundy. The heaviness carries with it, how- 
ever, its compensation in a certain senatorial dignity, and 


FIG. 1O9—SECTION OF FACADE OF ST. TROPHIME, ARLES. (COURTESY OF 
PROFESSOR A. KINGSLEY PORTER) 


accords well with the solid spirit of Romanesque architecture. 
The other great collection of sculptures in this region, dating 
from the middle to the end of the twelfth century and per- 
haps earlier than those of Arles, is found on the facade of 
the church at St. Gilles. 

Poitou and Saintonge. In the interdependent schools of 
Poitou and Saintonge, the carvings, lavished over the archi- 
volts and often over large sections of the facade, possess 
more decorative value than technical fineness. The relief on 
the archivolts tends to an oriental flatness, creating the effect 


202 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


of a rich embroidery. Since the portals ordinarily had no 
tympana, it was the arches that were very extensively carved 
with human forms, vying with motifs of monsters and vege- 
tation. A common subject for the embellishment of facades 
was the mounted cavalier, usually representing the emperor 
Constantine but occasionally St. George, St. Martin, or 
even other personages. Among the best churches for the 
study of the Romanesque of this region are Notre Dame la 
Grande at Poitiers, St. Pierre at Angouléme (sadly “re- 
stored’’), Sainte Marie aux Dames at Saintes, and St. Pierre 
at Aulnay. A section of the sculptural adornment of Notre 
Dame de la Couldre at Parthenay in Poitou may now be 
seen at Fenway Court, Boston. 

Other schools. The Romanesque output of the other French 
provinces is not distinguished by such clearly defined fea- 
tures. The most interesting monument in Auvergne is the 
lateral door of Notre Dame du Port at Clermont-Ferrand, the 
large figures of which betray less stubby proportions than 
were usual in this region. The style of Auvergne seems to 
have coalesced with other strains to produce the great 
tympanum of Ste. Foy at Conques, although, geographically 
speaking, the church does not he strictly in the province. 
Executed in the second quarter of the twelfth century, it may 
have been of great significance in forming the developed 
school of Auvergne, influencing even the portal of Notre 
Dame du Port. Famous specimens of the rich sculptural 
treasures of the Loire exist at St. Benoit-sur-Loire and at 
La Charité-sur-Loire. The district of the Ile-de-France was 
already evolving Gothic. 


C. SPAIN 


The great period of Spanish Romanesque began at the end 
of the eleventh century with the introduction of French in- 
fluence through the Order of Cluny and through the incessant 
flow of pilgrims to the shrine of Santiago de Compostela. 
The hypothesis of an international school attached to the 
Way of St. James has already been outlined above as an 
explanation of the similar characteristics of French and Span- 


THE MIDDLE AGES 203 


ish Romanesque sculpture, in place of the orthodox theory 
of a dependence upon: France; Professor Porter even believes 
that if perchance the workshops of one country predominated 
over those of another, Sto. Domingo de Silos and Compostela 
were probably more vital centres than Toulouse. But the 
evidence does not as yet seem to justify the repudiation of 
the traditional explanation; and the school of Languedoc 
may still be looked upon as the most considerable creditor 
of Spanish Romanesque. The most significant work at Sto. 
Domingo de Silos, in the style of the carvings in the cloister 
of Moissac, is found in the six superb reliefs on the corner 
piers of the cloister, embodying the last episodes of the 
Gospels; the two reliefs at the southwest angle, the Annuncia- 
tion and the Tree of Jesse, belong to early Gothic. Even 
if we follow Professor Porter in accepting as remote a 
date as c. 1075 for the six reliefs, instead of the more usual 
date of the middle of the twelfth century, the priority of one 
great Spanish monument does not imply that France was not 
the general source of energy, that earlier and now destroyed 
French carvings may not have provided precedents for Sto. 
Domingo, or that during the great period of Romanesque, the 
twelfth century, France did not assume the hegemony which 
Sto. Domingo may momentarily have held. In any case, it 
is not absolutely proved that the six reliefs are of the eleventh 
century. The subdivision of the school of Languedoc that 
had its seat at Toulouse itself is most signally represented 
in the first half of the twelfth century by the south portal 
of Santiago de Compostela, the Puerta de Platerias (Fig. 
110), which in disposition of carvings and in style resembles 
the south door of St. Sernin at Toulouse. Although some of 
the sculpture on the Puerta de Platerias has been imported 
from the destroyed portal of the north transept and perhaps 
from a west portal replaced by the present Portico de la 
Gloria, yet even in its original condition it must have be- 
trayed a tendency to cover every inch of the surface with 
carvings. This complete investiture of a facade is a common 
indigenous characteristic, carried to a farther point than in 
the analogous proclivity of the school of Poitou and oc- 
casioned by proximity to the prodigal art of Moorish Spain. 


204 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Occasionally other schools found favor. Of several possible 
examples of an Italian influence, the lower facade of the 
church at Ripoll in Catalonia exhibits its superabundant 
carving arranged in bands in the manner of the Lombard- 
Romanesque; the reliefs themselves, direct adaptations of 
the illuminations in the Catalan manuscript, the Bible of 


FIG. 110—pUERTA DE PLATERIAS, CATHEDRAL, SANTIAGO DE COMPOSTELA. 
(PHOTO. LACOSTE) 


Farfa, or some similar Bible, constitute one of the most 
undeniable examples of the influence of miniatures upon 
sculpture. 


D. GERMANY AND RELATED COUNTRIES 


General character of monumental German sculpture in the 
Romanesque period. The best Romanesque work of Ger- 
many is found in her bronzes, continuing the tradition of 
the Carolingian Age, and in her sepulchral effigies. The 


THE MIDDLE AGES 205 


monumental decoration of churches in stone is technically 
somewhat inferior to that of France. In the more national 
style that prevailed until about 1180, as in the tympanum of 
the north portal of St. Cecilia, Cologne, the compositions 
were simpler, and the forms were not only more solid and 


Fic. 1ll—FoONT. CATHEDRAL, HILDESHEIM. (PHOTO. DR. FR. STOEDTNER, 
BERLIN ) 


tranquil but also less naturalistic; at the end of the twelfth 
century the indebtedness to France and Italy became much 
more apparent. No portals or facades have the magnificence 
of Moissac, Vézelay, or Angouléme; the cathedral of Basel 
and the church of St. James at Ratisbon provide the only 
examples of importance, both belonging to the very end of 
the Romanesque period and both under foreign influence. 


206 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Bronzes. The Saxon 
workers in bronze attained 
such popularity that they 
exported doors like those of 
Hildesheim even to Verona 
in Italy, to Novgorod in 
Russia, and to Gnesen in 
Poland. In this as in other 
phases of German Roman- 
esque sculpture, either 
through Byzantine or 
French influence the forms 
gradually became more 
correct, but on the other 
hand there was a partial 
loss of the old Teutonic 
realism. The two valves 
of the door of 8. Zeno at 
Verona are now a con- 
olomeration from ruder sec- 
tions belonging to the first 
half of the eleventh cen- 
tury and more advanced 
sections of a subsequent en- 
largement in the twelfth 
century. A more developed 
knowledge _ distinguishes 
also the bronze doors of 
the cathedral at Augsburg. 
In the bronze lion set up by 
Henry the Lion as his em- 
blem in 1166 at Brunswick, 
heraldic conventionaliza- 
tion is tempered by natu- 
ralistic study, and Ger- 
manic pride exults in a 
superb consciousness of 
strength. The font in the 


ric 112—romp or arcupisHop rrep- Cathedral of Hildesheim, as 


ERICK I. CATHEDRAL, MAGDEBURG. 
(PHOTO. DR. FR STOEDTNER, BERLIN) 


THE MIDDLE AGES 207 


ornate in decoration as it is elaborate in iconography, was 
executed at the beginning of the thirteenth century, but still 
belongs to the same Saxon tradition (Fig. 111). 

Tombs. Saxony was likewise a centre for the production 
of grave-reliefs in bronze. As in the series of doors, crude 
realism, represented at the end of the eleventh century by 
the effigy of Rudolf of Swabia in the cathedral at Merseburg, 
gave way in the twelfth to a desire for correctness, repose, 
formal beauty of draperies, and idealism, represented by the 
monument of the Archbishop Frederick I in the cathedral at 
Magdeburg (Fig. 112). Much the same evolution may be 
traced in the succession of sepulchral effigies in stone carved 
for the abbesses of Quedlinburg. 


EK. THE LOW COUNTRIES 


From the region that later became Belgium and Holland, 
little Romanesque sculpture remains. Its art was dominated 
chiefly by France, though Germany may have exercised some 
influence, especially in the adjacent districts of Holland and 
of the Meuse. Over the few tympana and other monuments, 
our scope does not permit us to tarry. Tournai was the 
most important sculptural centre, because its black marbles 
were made into fonts and sepulchral slabs and enjoyed such 
popularity in the twelfth century as to be exported into 
northern France and England. Even in the exported ex- 
amples, as, for instance, the slab conjectured to be the me- 
morial of Bishop Roger in the cathedral of Salisbury, the 
craft never rose much above the level of mere shopwork. 
Already in the twelfth century an important school of metal 
workers and goldsmiths had developed in the Walloon dis- 
trict of Belgium, deriving its forms, perhaps, from earlier 
ivory-carvers in this region, and it was probably this school 
that had the honor of producing the loveliest monument of 
Romanesque sculpture in the Low Countries, the brass font 
now in St. Barthélemy, Liége, executed in the first half of the 
twelfth century by Renier de Huy and decorated chiefly with 
a series of famous baptisms, skilfully varied in compact 
compositions. 


208 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


F. ENGLAND 


Chronology. Romanesque sculpture in England may be 
divided into two periods, the first extending from the Norman 
Conquest in 1066 to about the middle of the twelfth century 
and consisting of a rude and arduous apprenticeship in the 
art, the second including the latter half of the twelfth cen- 
tury and resulting under French influence in actual attain- 
ment. 

The first period. The early Romanesque style of England 
was an amelioration of the forms and conceptions inherited 


FIG. 113—TYMPANUM, CHURCH AT DINTON. (FROM “MEDIEVAL FIGURE- 
SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND” BY PRIOR AND GARDNER) 


from the barbaric productions of the ninth and tenth cen- 
turies. These were constructed of elements drawn from the 
Celtic tradition, but particularly from the ideas of the Scandi- 
navian raiders. The Normans, being Scandinavians them- 
selves and finding the Irish-Viking style to their taste, 
adopted it, developed it, and, as in the tympanum at Dinton, 
Bucks (Fig. 113), employed it for the decoration of their 
parish churches. The monsters of Norse mythology were 
endowed with Christian symbolism, the fighting warrior be- 
came a St. George or a St. Michael, and the old ornaments 


THE MIDDLE AGES 209 


of knob and interlacement remained the stock in trade of 
the stone-cutter. The qualities of the early Romanesque 
manner appear also in a large number of fonts 

The second period. Under the spell of the more mature 
and refined style of France, flat relief and the rendering of 
detail through incised lines were abandoned for modelling in 
the round, better proportions became the general rule, and 
the old symbolistic beasts and combats gave way to the more 
humane subjects from the Bible. Nevertheless, perhaps 
because of the sculptural sterility, in contrast to the archi- 
tectural achievements, of Normandy, upon which English 
art depended more closely than upon other French provinces, . 
the Romanesque sculpture of England was less distinguished 
than the architecture, and its amount was comparatively 
limited. For their models the English stone-cutters usually 
had to turn to other districts of France, which in certain 
instances taught them particularly how to use the portal 
as the vehicle of an iconographic system. For example, the 
west doorway of Rochester resembles in some respects the 
portals of Poitou and Saintonge. The sculptors of northern 
England derived their methods from Languedoc and sur- 
passed the south in their realization of form; their attain- 
ments may be illustrated by four reliefs in the cathedral 
library at Durham, containing episodes from the Passion and 
Resurrection. The fonts, such as that of Hereford cathedral, 
reveal the same improvement in style as the monumental 
carving. England produced very few sepulchral monuments 
prior to the Gothic period. The Romanesque examples were 
imitations of the slabs imported from Tournai; in the sec- 
ond half of the century they began to develop modelling in 
the round. The tomb of Bishop Jocelyn in the cathedral of 
Salisbury may be taken as typical. 


Ce ALY: 


General characteristics, schools, and chronology. In con- 
trast to the attitude that found its highest expression in 
France, the Italians tended to dissociate exterior carving from 
the general organic scheme, to look upon it as mere decora- 


210 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


tion, and therefore to employ for it slabs of marble inlay 
rather than the local stones of which the fabric itself was 
built. The iconographic schemes of France were paralleled 
only sporadically, and then under Transalpine influence. The 
production of the period may conveniently be treated in 
three geographical divisions, the northern or Lombard, the 
central or Tuscan, and the southern. In order that the 
sculpture of Nicola and Giovanni Pisano and their followers 
in the second half of the thirteenth and in the fourteenth 
century may subsequently be grouped together and considered 
as the Gothic output of Italy, a discussion of Italian plastic 
work of the first half of the thirteenth century is included 
at the present point. Such an arrangement is not illogical, 
since, although Italian carving of the early thirteenth cen- 
tury had already begun to be Gothic, Italy had as yet evolved 
no great Gothic schools, and the prevalent styles were, for 
the most part, only freer developments of the various Roman- 
esque manners. It is, In any case, a mere convention to 
apply either “Romanesque” or “Gothic” to the antiquarian 
school of Campania and Sicily in the twelfth and thirteenth 
centuries. 

Northern Italy. First period. At the end of the eleventh 
and beginning of the twelfth century the greater part of the 
important sculpture of northern Italy falls into two schools. 
In one of these schools, a more than usual addiction to the 
savagery of Romanesque subjects resulted in ruthless battle 
and hunting scenes and in a nightmare of grim beasts and 
revolting monsters, often tearing one another to pieces. Good 
specimens are afforded by the capitals of 8. Ambrogio, Milan, 
and by the facade of S. Michele at Pavia, where, according 
to the Lombard custom, the lower section is covered with a 
series of carved bands, disposed without any apparent order. 
The second school, which was founded by a Master Guglielmo, 
was not so much inclined to these brutal medleys and pre- 
ferred the human figure, in sacred and secular subjects, treat- 
ing it with a rude Lombard vigor. The style of Master 
Guglielmo, accompanied by his signature, may be seen upon 
the facade of the cathedral of Modena and in the reliefs 
from the New Testament at the left of the portal of S. Zeno, 


THE MIDDLE AGES 211 


Verona; the less ponderous and more flexible style of his 
pupil, Master Niccol6, also with the signature, may be studied 
in the reliefs from Genesis at the right on 8. Zeno (Fig. 114) 
and upon the main portals of the cathedrals of Verona and 
Ferrara. To this movement belongs a large amount of the 
carving of northern Italy in the first half of the twelfth 


FIG. 1l14—MASTER NICCOLO. RELIEFS FROM GENESIS. S. ZENO, VERONA. 
(PHOTO. ALINARI) 


century. Since the work of Guglielmo and Niccolo resembles 
the early style of Languedoc, the question of French influ- 
ence has been much mooted; but it has not yet been proved 
that the analogies are not due merely to the use of similar 
models in the minor arts and in the antique, or, if a re- 


*TIt is not absolutely proved that the Master Guglielmo of Verona 
is identical with the sculptor of Modena. 


212 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


lationship is to be postulated, whether the influence operated 
from France to Italy or from Italy to France or in both 
directions. Authorities, for instance, have not yet reached 
an agreement as to whether small effigies of Prophets on the 
vertical supports of the archivolts in the splayed doorways 
of the cathedrals at Cremona, Ferrara, and Verona may have 
assisted to set the precedent for the similar treatment of 
portals on a larger scale in French Gothic, or whether the 
primacy in the matter, on the contrary, belongs to the early 
school of Chartres. It is even possible that the idea origi- 
nated in such columns, carved with figures in relief, as may be 
seen in the Puerta de Platerias at Santiago. 

Northern Italy. Second period. The Gallic influence, now 
emanating from Provence, becomes indubitable in the latter 
part of the twelfth century. The disseminating centre about 
1175-1180 may have been a later workshop at Modena, repre- 
sented by a series of reliefs in the cathedral containing epi- 
sodes of the Passion from the old parapet of the tribune; and 
here perhaps was trained the chief exponent of the tendency, 
Benedetto of Parma,' one of the most appealing of Roman- 
esque sculptors, whose activity began in 1178. His works 
exhibit so many analogies to the carvings of Arles and St. 
Gilles that it is almost necessary to assume that at some time 
he himself studied also in Provence, and his draperies suggest 
that, like the sculptors of these Provencal towns, he may have 
seen even the early Gothic carvings of Chartres. His mature 
style is exemplified in his extensive decoration of the exterior 
and interior of the Baptistery at Parma, where two of the 
three doorways that possess sculpture (Fig. 115) are elabo- 
rated into the iconographic systems of France. The em- 
bellishment of the facade of the cathedral at Borgo San 
Donnino is absolutely in his manner and probably partly 
executed by his own chisel. Although, as a true Italian, he 
was never quite able to harmonize his creations with their 
architectural setting, it was in all likelihood a familiarity 


*Until recently usually known as Benedetto Antelami; but there 
is good reason for believing that Antelamz was not a surname but the 
title of a guild of builders and sculptors derived from the valley of 
Antelami in the Apennines. 


THE MIDDLE AGES 213 


with Proveneal prototypes that helped him to attain in his 
larger figures true monumentality. The angels accentuating 
some of the archheads in the interior of the Baptistery em- 
body a solemn grace that is one of his most delightful quali- 
ties. In the Solomon and the Queen of Sheba on the outer 
wall, the intimate mysticism that pervades all his figures 
reaches its climax. The achievement of Benedetto ap- 


FIG. 115—BENEDETTO OF PARMA. PORTAL, BAPTISTERY, PARMA. (PHOTO. 
ALIN ARI) 


proaches close to early Gothic in its freedom, and much of 
north Italian sculpture at the end of the twelfth and be- 
ginning of the thirteenth century can be traced to his school. 

Central Italy. In central Italy, Tuscany was the only 
province of real sculptural significance. Even here the addic- 
tion to adornment by effects in marbles of different colors 
partially usurped the important place occupied by reliefs 
in the architecture of the northern and southern divisions 
of the peninsula. The Romanesque development came later 


214 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


than in other regions, and much of the carving seems to have 
been done by Lombard craftsmen. There was possibly also 
an infiltration of influence from Provence. The figure-work 
tends to be rather elementary, but the foliage and other 
decorative motifs are often of great skill and beauty. Even 
Lombard sculptors, when their hand is to be discerned, suc- 
cumbed to the old Etruscan tradition of this part of the pen- 
insula, modelling stocky forms and humorously large heads. 
Tuscan carving appears chiefly upon the architraves of portals 
at Pistoia and Lucca and upon such pulpits or ambos as that 
which Guido da Como executed in 1250 for S. Bartolommeo 
in Pantano at Pistoia. In the whole series of pulpits an in- 
terest in religious narrative, treated in rows of panels, is sub- 
stituted for the symbolic representations on the examples in 
southern Italy. The Romanesque sculpture on the tympana, 
lintels, and facade of the cathedral at Lucca, representing 
the lives of St. Martin and St. Regulus, the labors of the 
months, and the glorified Christ, is much more successful 
than the average Tuscan style in its rendering of form and 
drapery. 

Southern Italy. The Byzantine influence. The most sig- 
nificant sculpture in the south of the peninsula may be di- 
vided into two groups, the one deeply indebted to the art of 
Byzantium, the other based upon the antique. The unusually 
potent Byzantine inspiration was occasioned by the proximity 
to the Eastern Empire and by the fact that in 1066 the 
Benedictine abbot of Monte Cassino, Desiderius, summoned 
to his service a group of craftsmen from Constantinople, who 
diffused Greek forms throughout the district. An important 
manifestation of this Byzantine interest was a series of 
bronze doors. In the first sets, imported from Constanti- 
nople in the eleventh century, the figures were rendered by 
the process of damascening, the filling of grooves incised in 
the bronze with silver or enamel. After executing imitations 
of these specimens, the Italians next began to express the 
western feeling for saliency in contrast to Byzantine flat- 
ness by substituting reliefs for the damascening. A certain 
Barisanus of Trani, in the second half of the twelfth century, 
executed three doors of this kind—for his own town, for the 


THE MIDDLE AGES 215 


cathedral of Ravello, and for the lateral entrance of Monreale 
near Palermo. The panels usually contain single effigies of 
saints or such profane figures as centaurs, sirens, dragons, 
cavaliers, or archers. Occasionally Biblical scenes are ad- 
mitted. The subjects in all cases are faithfully copied from 
Byzantine ivories or goldsmith’s work, and the same mould, 


FIG. 116—DETAIL OF BRONZE DOORS, CATHEDRAL, BENEVENTO. (PHOTO. 
ALIN ARI) 


as at Augsburg, is frequently repeated twice or oftener, 
even on the same door. In the more essentially Italian ex- 
amples by Bonannus of Pisa for a side entrance of his own 
cathedral and for the main entrance of Monreale, sacred 
episodes intruded into the panels, ultimately of Byzantine 
suggestion but executed with a less exquisite technique, with 
stronger relief, and with a more pronounced, popular bon- 


216 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


homie than in the doors by Barisanus. The exact relation- 
ship between the works of Barisanus and Bonannus and the 
similar Romanesque doors of Germany is as yet an unsolved 
question. It remained to combine the Italian naturalism 
of Bonannus with a high degree of Byzantine skill. This 
task was achieved at the end of the twelfth century in the 
anonymous bronze doors of the cathedral of Benevento 
(Eigesl Ole 

Southern Italy. The antiquarian tendency. Campania 
and Sicily were the seats of a movement which outdistanced 


FIG. 117—BUSTS OF PIER DELLE VIGNE AND OF PERSONIFIED CAPUA. 
MUSEUM, CAPUA 


the rest of Romanesque sculpture in its knowledge aud repro- 
duction of the antique and which has a peculiar significance 
as the probable training-school of Nicola d’Apulia. The 
carving of this movement is found principally on pieces of 
ecclesiastical furniture, such as pulpits and paschal candle- 
sticks. The robust bodies, the poses and costumes, the vigor- 
ous relief, were suggested by fragments of Roman sculpture, 
but, like the Byzantine forms of the door at Benevento, the 
classical borrowings were revivified by an appreciation of 
every-day life. The style appears in a long series of monu- 
ments, famous among which are the ambos at Salerno and the 


THE MIDDLE AGES 217 


reliefs with the lives of Joseph, Samson, and others in the 
chapel of S. Restituta in the cathedral of Naples. An- 
tiquarianism became even more pronounced under the em- 
peror Frederick II. His chief sculptural undertaking was 
the decoration in 1234 of a castle or work of defence at 
Capua in the form of a Roman triumphal arch. Fragments 
of this have now been gathered in the local Museum (Fig. 
117): a decapitated effigy of the Emperor with the dignity 
and the toga of a Roman senator; busts of his ministers, Pier 
delle Vigne and Taddeo da Sessa, reproductions of Roman 
busts; a noble head of the personified city of Capua, copied 
perhaps from an old Juno; and other, ornamental heads. 


III. GorHic SCULPTURE 
A. INTRODUCTION 


General characteristics of the sculpture of the thirteenth 
century. The Gothic sculptor took advantage of the knowl- 
edge gained by his Romanesque predecessor, but he largely 
abandoned the models of the miniatures and the other minor 
arts and the resulting conventions. He studied nature itself, 
and attained much greater skill in its reproduction. He 
thought no more in the derivative terms of a small illumina- 
tion or ivory, but in the absolute terms of the finished and 
monumental stone figure. So far as any movement in art 
has ever been original, the Gothic period evolved this plastic 
sense and its own forms from its own esthetic consciousness. 
The statues tended to emerge from the mass of the building, 
to stand forth in the round, to lose their frontality, and to 
be the objects of more special attention; but at the same time, 
by their position in projecting shrines and by a stateliness 
that would make it possible to inscribe their principal out- 
lines within imaginary upright piers, they preserved a connec- 
tion with the architecture and an architectural feeling. 
Despite the advance in correctness of representation, the 
artist used for his forms the simple, noble lines and the 
idealization proper to the severity and formality of archi- 


218 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


tectural decoration. In small reliefs, narrative also was 
treated with an architectural simplicity. The episode was 
reduced to its lowest terms, the fewest possible figures were 
used, the setting and accessories were not realistic but re- 
stricted to a merely suggestive scale and number, the con- 
trolled postures and gestures aimed only at an unvarnished 
exposition of the tale. Simplicity and idealization, these 
were the dominant notes of the thirteenth century, and these 
were the qualities that could fitly express its lofty and 
robust religion. The whole Gothic period, indeed, as the 
most essentially Christian of all artistic epochs, laid the 
emphasis not upon the beauties of the body but upon the 
expression of the thoughts and emotions of the soul. The 
nature of the expression varied between degrees of idealism 
and realism in the several centuries; and diverse treatments 
of the drapery partially took the place that the body and 
the nude had occupied in ancient art as aids to artistic 
utterance or as objects of purely esthetic delight. 

The fourteenth century. The monumental decoration of 
the churches was now largely finished, and the chisel was 
confined more and more to such separate articles of ecclesi- 
astical furniture as devotional statues or to the tombs by 
which the individuals who had succeeded to the municipali- 
ties in patronage sought to perpetuate their fame. By the 
middle of the fourteenth century a kind of international style 
had developed, the radiating centre of which was probably 
France. Wherever the figure was still employed in archi- 
tectural adornment, it lost its architectural lines, often bent 
to the side and backward, and was a detached entity. The 
ampler draperies, though more naturalistic in texture and 
folds than those of the thirteenth century, were conceived 
as opportunities for the display of ingenuity in design. Wind- 
ing hither and thither, they separated into smaller pleats, 
and sought effects of chiaroscuro through deeper indentations. 
In body and drapery alike, the sculptors endeavored to obtain 
the long, undulating lines that have become synonymous with 
the word Gothic. The broad and generalizing manner that 
was suited to architectural function inevitably gave way to 
“fussiness” of detail and here and there to further individual- 


THE MIDDLE AGES 219 


ization of the figures. The tendency to subtlety rather than 
to monumentality augmented the number of small anecdotal 
panels in architectural adornment. Even at the end of the 
thirteenth century, idealism, having exhausted itself, had 
already, by a natural evolution, begun to incline towards ex- 
cessive refinement or to react towards a more careful repro- 
duction of actuality. In other words, the sculpture of the 
fourteenth century was characterized by mannered idealism 
and by prognostications of the coming realism. 

The fifteenth century. A profounder realism was the dis- 
tinctive feature of the fifteenth century, and the realistic 
tendency was ubiquitous; but Flanders, eventually, played an 
important part in the dissemination of the style, and Ger- 
many gave it the most pronounced expression. The drapery 
was now often treated with varying complications and under- 
cuttings to create pictorial effects of light and shade. The 
Mystery plays, which were at the height of their popularity, 
exerted an influence upon art that has been variously esti- 
mated; but it can scarcely be doubted that the realistic tone 
of the religious theatre, especially in matters of costume and 
episodical genre, was reflected in both sculpture and painting. 
The intellectual faith that had been embodied in the scholastic 
philosophy of the thirteenth century and had animated the 
spiritualized figures upon the cathedrals was submerged in 
the fifteenth century, partly owing to the influence of Fran- 
ciscanism, beneath an emotional tendency that infused senti- 
ment into the objects of its devotion. The internationalism 
of the fourteenth century gave way to national styles and 
in these national styles, with the emergence of the per- 
sonal artist, even to local schools based upon the achieve- 
ments of individual masters. While retaining certain com- 
mon European elements, such as realism and a very general 
allegiance to Flemish standards, the Gothic art of the sev- 
eral countries became more differentiated. Italy, though she 
too shared in the universal realism, separated herself even 
more than hitherto from the rest of Europe and became the 
torch-bearer of the Renaissance. 

The “détente.” In France, at the end of the century, the 
tumultuous storm of realism abated, a sudden lull once more 


220 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


spread the calm of idealism and simplicity over the graven 
images, and thus occurred what has been called the relaxation 
or détente. The tendency may be discerned sporadically in 
the Low Countries, Spain, and even Germany. 

Iconography of the thirteenth century. With some im- 
portant exceptions, the subjects of early Gothic sculpture 
continued the same as those of the Romanesque period. The 
great innovation was that the superb intellectualism of the 
thirteenth century codrdinated all the carvings and stained 
glass of each cathedral into one mighty iconographic scheme. 
The effort had already extended itself during the preceding 
century over single portals or even facades, but now the dif- 
ferent subjects that had been scattered separately through 
many churches were collected into the ornamentation of one 
cathedral, the decoration of the whole edifice was brought 
within the system, and the scope of each section was enlarged. 
The constituent parts of the scheme were arranged with 
stricter logic, and yet much ingenuity was exercised in vary- 
ing the disposition from town to town. Our Lord, as the 
source of all things, is ensconced on the central pillar of the 
main portal or in the Last Judgment on the tympanum above. 
All ancient history prepares the way for His coming or is 
symbolic of His life upon earth; He is therefore surrounded 
by the Prophets and by His ancestors according to the flesh; 
and their stories are enshrined in reliefs or in the windows. 
All subsequent history tells of Him or is derived from Him; 
He is therefore accompanied by the Apostles and saints, and, 
without and within, are figured the episodes of the New 
Testament, of sacred legend, and occasionally even of pro- 
fane history, so far as it is connected with the development 
of Christianity. Since Christ’s mother was an object of 
even dearer devotion in the thirteenth century than hereto- 
fore, at least one of the doors is allotted to her, and her 
images and the events of her life are multiplied throughout 
the church. <A third door is given to the patron saint or 
saints. Nature is Christ’s handiwork, and so the artist may 
carve his capitals and mouldings with the loveliest and most 
varied foliage of his native land. The storied capital is much 
less frequent, vanquished by this love of the natural world, 


THE MIDDLE AGES 221 


and even when figure-subjects still remain, they are usually 
combined with foliage. The sculptor repudiates the conven- 
tionalized Romanesque plant, and returns to nature, not only 
for a study of the human form, but also for decorative motifs 
of flower and leaf. Sometimes he fills the interstices with 
birds. Less often he introduces the other animals into his 
iconographic plan. The wonders of the Bestiaries are related 
amidst the verdure of the capitals. Not uncommonly the 
birds and beasts have a symbolic significance, like the four 
emblems of the Evangelists, or the pelican indicative of the 
Atonement. The monsters and savage scenes of Romanesque 
imagination have disappeared, except in rare instances, and 
in their stead the barbaric blood that still ran in Gothic 
veins created the gargoyles. The hieraticism of the Roman- 
esque period also yielded. As adornment for the tympana, 
the Apocalyptic Christ and the Ascension disappeared in 
favor of the more animated Last Judgment, and the more 
touching Coronation of the Virgin took the place of the 
haughtily enthroned Queen. For the single space of the 
Romanesque tympanum were substituted zones of sacred 
figures and narrative. 

Iconography of the fifteenth century. In the compara- 
tively small amount of monumental decoration during the 
fourteenth century and in the other phases of sculpture, no 
essential changes manifested themselves; but by the fifteenth 
century, Gothic iconography had suffered some losses and 
made compensating gains. In those few churches that re- 
ceived an extensive sculptural adornment, the scheme of ar- 
rangement was somewhat less carefully thought out than by 
the synthetic minds of the thirteenth century. The Sibyls, 
whose popularity had originated in Italy, were joined with 
the Prophets as inspired harbingers of the Christian dispen- 
sation. The growing velleity for the pathetic and for sub- 
jects connected with death multiplied abnormally the scenes 
from the Passion. Just before 1400, it added to the sacred 
repertoire also the Pieta, the dead Christ upon His mother’s 
lap, and between 1420 and 1450, the Entombment or Holy 
Sepulchre as a large separate work of art. The infinitude of 
themes, sacred, secular, and grotesque, on the Romanesque 


222 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


capitals obtained, in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, a 
new lease of life on the misericords and other parts of the 
choir-stalls. 

The tombs. It was in the Romanesque period that there 
appeared the first tombs sculptured with a representation of 
the deceased. Comparatively few in number, they consist 
merely of a slab of stone or bronze containing the effigy 
executed in high or low relief and naively conceived simply 
as a standing figure laid on his back. The earliest extant 
examples, of the second half of the eleventh century, are 
German; and indeed throughout the Romanesque period, it 
is only the German specimens that have any esthetic signifi- 
cance. 

In the Gothic period the tombs sculptured with a re- 
cumbent effigy of the deceased may be divided into three 
general classes, within each of which occur many modifi- 
cations and variations in detail: the slab of stone or bronze 
embodying the effigy and usually set in the pavement of the 
church; a high base surmounted by the effigy, isolated or 
against the wall; and a miniature Gothic edifice, made of a 
niche in the wall or projecting from the wall, the whole more 
or less elaborately adorned and containing the effigy, like- 
wise upon a base or sarcophagus. There were, however, many 
sporadic anomalies in sepulchres; and almost every country 
developed national peculiarities, which will be noted in their 
proper places. The different parts of the two more pre- 
tentious classes of tombs were often carved with the scenes 
of the death, funeral, and reception of the deceased into 
heaven, with figures of relatives and dependents, and, espe- 
cially after 1300, with themes from sacred history. In the 
fourteenth century the relatives and dependents began to be 
represented in the formal mourner’s costume of a heavy cape 
and enveloping hood, except in England, where this dress was 
not assumed until a hundred years later. In general, in the 
spirit of contemporary Gothic architecture, the sepulchres 
of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries took on a more 
elaborate embellishment of decorative detail, of multiplied 
reliefs, and numerous statuettes. Over the type of tomb with 
a high base, a canopy was sometimes erected, especially 


THE MIDDLE AGES 223 


towards the end of the Gothic period. Before 1400 there 
had already appeared, in place of or together with the effigy, 
a new motif that constantly gained in popularity, the morti- 
fied cadaver. By the end of the fifteenth century, the kneel- 
ing posture for the deceased had begun to enter upon that 
usurpation of the recumbent posture which was frequent in 
the sixteenth century. 

At first the efforts of the sculptors were largely directed 
towards lifting the effigy from the sunken flatness of the 
Romanesque slab to existence in the round. It was not until 
the latter part of the thirteenth century that they began to 
break with the Romanesque convention of carving the body 
like a prostrate standing figure, and it was only in the four- 
teenth century that they gradually attained the ability to give 
the impression of recumbency to form and drapery. The ideal- 
ism of the thirteenth century manifested itself in the choice 
of early manhood or womanhood for representation, no mat- 
ter at what age the decease had taken place, and it postponed 
the beginning of portraiture in sepulchral effigies until just 
before 1300. By the end of the fourteenth century mortuary 
portraiture had been definitely evolved. 

A fourth type of memorial, which may conveniently be de- 
scribed by the technical German term epitaph, was the mor- 
tuary tablet or larger relief in which the deceased usually 
kneels in adoration before some religious subject. By the 
time of the Renaissance the epitaphs had often developed 
into great structures against the walls, sometimes with figures 
in the round, and the themes were not always drawn from the 
sacred repertoire. In its simpler or its more ambitious form, 
this sepulchral type has enjoyed constant favor almost to 
the present day. 

The retable. The sculptured Gothic reredos, or to use the 
more cosmopolitan term, the Gothic retable, began to enter 
upon its career of prodigious popularity in the fourteenth 
century. A few earlier examples exist, even from the Roman- 
esque period; but it was not until the fifteenth century that 
the retables attained their greatest size and the height of their 
development and vogue. 


224 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 
B. FRANCE 


1. The Transition from Romanesque to Gothic 


The School of Chartres. The qualities of Gothic sculpture 
were already embryonically present in the Ile-de-France and 
the immediately adjoining territory by the middle of the 
twelfth century. From another standpoint, therefore, since 
the carvings of this region were still marked by a consider- 
able degree of stiffness and conventionality, and since repre- 
sentation was still readily subordinated to esthetic exigency, 
it would be possible to denominate them as Romanesque; 
they certainly constituted the archaic preparation for de- 
veloped Gothic more truly than the Romanesque work of the 
other schools. Much confusion exists as to where the im- 
pulse to the new movement first appeared; some authorities 
hold that it was the west portal of St. Denis (in its present 
condition almost entirely a modern restoration) which set 
the precedent. In any case, the movement is most satis- 
factorily illustrated by the west portal of the cathedral of 
Chartres, embodying, within the same general style, different 
stages of attainment that date from about 1140-1165, and 
perhaps containing even slightly later work in the Apoca- 
lyptic Elders at the springing of the main archivolts. The 
designer has gathered about the three doors a vast icono- 
graphic ensemble consecrated to the glorification of Our Lord. 
The idea of decorating the deeply splayed openings with 
rows of statues, henceforth to be so common a Gothic motif, 
is here fully matured in the effigies of Christ’s ancestors. 
They have so far emerged into separate entities as to be set 
upon pedestals, and they are largely realized in the round 
(Fig. 118). Despite the retention of a partial rigidity, de- 
claring itself even in frontality, naturalism has made con- 
quests everywhere, especially in the highly individualized 
heads and narrow, clinging draperies. 

Relation to the Romanesque of other French provinces. 
The question of dates is so difficult that it is hard to say how 
far these works exhibit a derivation from the Romanesque 
achievements of the rest of France or how far they exhibit a 


THE MIDDLE AGES 225 


parallel evolution. Certainly some important, though not 
definitive, characteristics of the northern school appear also 
in the other provinces. The elaborately wrought colonnettes, 
the storied capitals, and the iconography of the tympana, 
especially the central one at Chartres with the noble Christ 
between the Evangelistic symbols, are more Romanesque 
than Gothic. The progress from relief to modelling in the 


FIG. 118—SCULPTURE ON WEST PORTAL OF CATHEDRAL, CHARTRES 


round had already begun in the Romanesque art of other 
regions. The excessive elongation of Vézelay, Autun, and 
Moissac is here bestowed upon the larger statues in order that 
they may have the same architectural effect as the supporting 
pillars. The treatment of the garments in minute pleats and 
the general refinement of manner recall Burgundy; such 
peculiarities in drapery as the crescent folds upon the chest 
and the designation of folds by double lines are native also 


226 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


to Languedoc. Professor Porter has recently suggested that 
the chief master at Chartres was trained in Poitou and 
Saintonge. Stylistic and particularly chronological grounds 
prevent us from accepting Voge’s theory of a primary de- 
pendence upon Provence; the influence apparently moved 
rather from the north to the south. Whatever precedents 
the exponents of the new manner had, the innovations were 
so many and so significant as to promise more originality for 
the movement than for any previous epoch of Christian 
sculpture. 

Other examples of the School of Chartres. There are many 
other monuments in northern France, dating from about the 
middle to the end of the twelfth century, which were produced 
by the same school that worked at Chartres. The Metropoli- 
tan Museum is so fortunate as to possess a beautiful ex- 
ample from some one of these monuments, probably repre- 
senting a King of Judah. 


2. The Thirteenth Century 


The first half of the century. The esthetic ideals which 
were innate in the Gothic genius and which had already been 
foretold in the school of the west portal of Chartres were now 
realized. The transitory breath of keener naturalism that had 
distinguished the best carving at Chartres succumbed every- 
where to a high religious idealism which reached its ultimate 
expression in the rightly named Beau Dieu of Amiens, the 
Christ on the pier of the central door. Two kinds of stuff 
may be seen in the French draperies of the thirteenth cen- 
tury—a thinner material falling in smaller, more numerous, 
and almost parallel folds, as on the lateral portals of 
Chartres, and a heavier fabric falling in larger, fewer, and 
more curving folds, as on the front portals of Amiens (Fig. 
119); but in either case the Byzantine subtlety of the earlier 
draperies loosened from the body and expanded into freedom 
and nobility of line confined within a solemn grace. Another 
celebrated instance of the sober elegance of Gothic in north- 
ern France in the first half of the thirteenth century is pro- 


THE MIDDLE AGES 227 


vided by the central and left doors of the main portal of 
the cathedral of Paris, excepting the large statues, which are 
modern. Lovely examples of narrative simplicity in small 
reliefs exist in the long double series, combined with rep- 
resentations of the Virtues, Vices, and Months, beneath the 
statues on the facade of Amiens (Fig. 120). 


FIG. 119—PORTE MERE-DIEU, CATHEDRAL, AMIENS. (COURTESY OF GIRAUDON, 
PHOTOGRAPHER ) 


The second half of the century. Many of the statues on 
the cathedral of Reims conform?! to the style of the first 
half of the century. Among the best of this class are those 
of the two portals of the north transept and the Samuel, 
Abraham, Moses, Isaiah, St. John Baptist, and Simeon on 
the right portal of the west facade. But the majority of 


*In writing of Reims, the present tense is used for the sake of 
convenience, although much of the sculpture has been destroyed. 


228 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the sculptured figures at Reims, notably the other statues of 
the portals of the west facade and the numerous statues 
scattered over the upper parts of the building, date from the 
second half of the century and reveal several different styles. 
The Virgin and St. Elizabeth of the Visitation, on the central 
door of the facade (Fig. 121), belong to a manner strongly 
influenced by the antique, which is exemplified, as a sporadic 
phenomenon in France, by other statues on the cathedral 


FIG. 120—RELIEFS BENEATH STATUES OF HEROD AND THE THREE KINGS, 
FACADE OF CATHEDRAL, AMIENS 


and which, emanating from Reims, became popular in Ger- 
many. ‘The ‘angel of the Annunciation on the central door 
(Fig. 121) embodies still another plastic fashion, which is 
also frequently encountered at Reims and leads directly into 
the art of the fourteenth century. The exponents of this 
fashion cultivated a more realistic expressiveness in the face, 
here exemplified partly by the subtle smile; they began to 
bestow upon the body a mannered curve; and they sought 
in the drapery greater involution and a more sinuous grace. 
Another typical instance of this more fastidious style of the 


229 


THE MIDDLE AGES 


(YaHdvao0LOHd ‘NOdONvuIp 


JO XSALYN0O) 


“SIWIGY 


‘ 


TVUGHHLVO 


‘ 


aqVOVa LSaM JO HOOd IVYLNaO— 


1G 


I 


. 


Old 


230 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


later thirteenth century is afforded by the Madonna, tym- 
panum, and archivolts of the Porte Dorée at Amiens. 

Dissemination of the Gothic style. Having cast its spell 
over northern France in the first half of the thirteenth cen- 
tury, Gothic sculpture in the second won the centre and south 
of the country to its allegiance, especially along the pil- 
grimage routes to Compostela. The renowned and captivat- 
ing Last Judgment of the main tympanum at Bourges adds to 
the expressiveness of Reims the taste for animated and 
realistic episode that was to characterize the succeeding cen- 
tury. A well-known monument of the south is the porch of 
St. Seurin at Bordeaux. 


FIG. 122—TOMB OF PHILIP, BROTHER OF ST. LOUIS. ST. DENIS 


The tombs of the thirteenth century. The two more pre- 
tentious classes of Gothic sepulchres, of which the type with 
the high base is more numerous, are well represented in the 
royal mausoleum, the abbey of St. Denis, by the sixteen 
tombs that in 1264 St. Louis caused to be constructed for his 
predecessors from Dagobert to Louis VI and by the tombs 
of his eldest son, Louis, and his brother, Philip (Fig. 122). 
The bases of the two latter monuments are embellished with 
the procession of the obsequies. The fine statue of Prince 
Louis is already partially felt as reposing in the sleep of 
death. Portraiture is begun at St. Denis in the white marble 
figure of St. Louis’s successor, Philip III, who died in 1285 
but whose tomb was not commenced until 1298. 


THE MIDDLE AGES 231 


3. The Fourteenth Century 


The decoration of the cathedrals went on until the second 
quarter of the century; but, with the adoption of a mannered 
grace and elegance, the statues largely renounced their archi- 
tectural feeling. For the sake, however, of making some 
show at connection with the edifice, they were sunk in archi- 
tectural niches in place of the protruding shrines of the 
thirteenth century. A good example of the style of the period 
is afforded by the decoration of the more easterly part of the 
cathedral at Bordeaux. 
The portal of the north 
transept contains at the 
centre a restored efhigy of 
Pope Clement V and at 
the sides six prelates. Al- 
though the heads of the 
six prelates are already 
somewhat individualized, 
the figures are still in a 
rather sober style. It is in 
the tympanum and espe- 
cially in the statues upon 
the buttresses of the apse 
that the new forms, the 
new drapery, and the new 
feeling appear. An abso- 
lutely characteristic speci- FIG. 123—vIRGIN. CATHEDRAL, PARIS 
men of the style in an 
American collection is the St. John Baptist of the Metro- 
politan Museum (accession no. 16. 32. 39). The small 
anecdotal panels are more typical of the sculptural embellish- 
ment of architecture in the fourteenth century. Notable in- 
stances are: the Porte des Libraires of the cathedral at 
Rouen, especially the grotesques; the scenes from the life of 
the Virgin set into the exterior chapel walls of the east end 
of the cathedral of Paris; and the facade of the cathedral 
at Lyons, including illustrations of contemporary short stories 
and genre from every-day life. A lovely instance of the an- 


232 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


ecdotal interest applied to interior decoration is the series of 
reliefs from the life of Christ on the choir-screen of the 
cathedral of Paris by Jean Ravy and his nephew Jean le 
Bouteillier. The mode of the fourteenth century is most un- 
mistakably illustrated by the many separate devotional sta- 
tues of the Virgin and Child (Fig. 123). Their expression 
is likely to tend towards ‘“‘smiling coquetry”’ or, in accordance 
with the growing inclination for pathos, to sorrowful musing. 
In general, the kindly queen of the early thirteenth century 


FIG. 124—CHARLES V AND JEANNE DE BOURBON. LOUVRE, PARIS. (PHOTO. 
GIRAUDON ) 


gradually assumed the mien of a more ordinary woman. In 
no other class of sculpture is the characteristic curve of the 
body more apparent. 

The School of Paris. As the year 1400 approached, the 
style of the fourteenth century tended to assume at Paris 
a more individual form. A colony of Flemings had been 
establishing themselves at the French capital since the be- 
ginning of the century; the chief of these in the second half 
of the century was the painter and sculptor, André Beau- 
neveu (active 1360-1403). To them it has been the custom 
to ascribe the more decided realism that marked the ebbing 


THE MIDDLE AGES 233 


of the fourteenth and the incoming of the fifteenth century. 
But it cannot be demonstrated that the sculpture of Flanders 
up to this moment had revealed any greater predilection for 
realism than that of the other countries of Europe, and native 
French sculptors were also prominent in Paris. A sounder 
criticism would conceive of the proclivity towards realism 
as a generally prevalent characteristic of the period, de- 
veloping into a more emphatic form at Paris because the 
vigorous artistic atmosphere of the great city fostered all new 
movements. Realism found an expression not only in se- 
pulchral effigies, but also in portrait statues, which now 
began to be popular. The figures of Charles V and his queen 
Jeanne de Bourbon were erected not only at one entrance to 
the old Louvre but also at the portal of the chapel of the 
Célestins. The two latter statues, by an unknown sculptor, 
are still extant in the Museum of the Louvre (Fig. 124). 
Both are superb examples of the best medieval portraiture. 
The queen, instead of being rejuvenated as in earlier idealistic 
sculpture, is represented as much older than she actually 
was in order that the artist may have opportunity for a 
realism that is more unsparing. 

The tombs. The draperies even of sepulchral effigies were 
somewhat more flowing and involved than before, but the 
rigidity of death imbued them with greater conservatism than 
was retained in the decorative sculpture of churches. Por- 
traiture was definitely achieved in the monument of Charles 
V at St. Denis by André Beauneveu. The fixed type of 
the French knight, clad in armor, with shield at side and 
hands pressed together in prayer, is well exemplified in St. 
Denis by the effigies of the two constables, Bertrand du 
Guesclin and Louis de Sancerre, who died respectively in 
1380 and 1402. In both these instances, the portraiture 
is more realistic than in the figure of their master, Charles 
V. With a slight variation, the knights of Burgundy hold 
in their hands a lance. The more pretentious adornment of 
tombs in the fourteenth century may be illustrated by the 
monuments of the popes at Avignon; one or two of these 
carry the elaboration to the point of constructing an opulent 
canopy over the effigy on a free-standing base. 


234 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


4, The Fifteenth Century 


The School of Burgundy. Origins. An important con- 
stituent of the Burgundian style of the fifteenth century was 
a pronounced strain of Flemish, or, according to other critics, 
German realism. The chief master of the school during its 
early period, Claus Sluter (d. 1406?), was probably of Dutch 
extraction, but he may have had German blood in his veins. 
In any case, direct Flemish influence was constantly exer- 
cised at the Burgundian court through the political con- 
nection with the Low Countries and through the presence at 
the capital, Dijon, of a series of Flemish artists. On the 
other hand, no sudden change took place in the tradition of 
French sculpture. Throughout the preceding century, espe- 
cially in the Parisian school, it had been slowly moving 
toward the consummation now achieved in Burgundy. In- 
deed, the principal immediate predecessor of Sluter in the 
employ of Philip the Bold, the Fleming Jean de Marville, had 
been drawn from the Parisian school; and the only piece of 
sculpture that can be ascribed to him with any degree of 
surety, the Virgin on the portal of the Carthusian monastery 
at Champmol in the environs of Dijon, does not differ essen- 
tially from the work of Sluter on the same monument, al- 
though, in this instance, Jean de Marville may have learned 
from the Dutch master. However the problem of origins 
be solved, the borrowings were transformed, elaborated, and 
treated in a new spirit, so that it is possible to speak of a 
distinct Burgundian school. Inasmuch as somewhat more 
massive bodies and copious draperies had already differen- 
tiated Burgundian sculpture even in the earlier Gothic period, 
it is perhaps legitimate to distinguish a native Burgundian 
strain in the work at Dijon during the fifteenth century. 

Monuments at Champmol. At the death of Jean de Mar- 
ville in 1389, Claus Sluter brought the portal of Champmol 
to completion. In addition to the statue of the Virgin, it in- 
cludes at either side the portraits of Philip the Bold and his 
wife, accompanied by Sts. John the Baptist and Catherine. 
He next erected a magnificent well in the cloister of the 
Carthusian monastery, of which the pedestal for the Calvary 


235 


THE MIDDLE AGES 


‘ 


AYHLSYNOW 


NVISONHLYVO 


“TIUM V UYHAO 


NOLid YVAN “IOWAWVHO 


AUYV 


ATVYO Youd TWLISaddd 


GAUGM Wd SAVIO GNV WALATS 


SOVTI 


9—GCT 


DId 


236 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


has been preserved in situ and the bust of the Crucified in 
the Museum of Dijon. He himself did all except the angelic 
caryatides, for which he drew the designs but the execu- 
tion of which he left to his nephew and assistant, Claus de 
Werve (d. 1439). The statuary of the pedestal (Fig. 125) is 
a crystallization of the kind of Mystery Play known as the 
Judgment of Jesus, in which the Prophets upheld in debate 
the necessity of the atoning sacrifice on the cross. The 
individualization and realism of the heads and postures are 


FIG. 126—CLAUS SLUTER AND CLAUS DE WERVE. TOMB OF PHILIP THE BOLD. 
MUSEUM, DIJON 


more penetrating than in previous French sculpture. The 
heaviness of the stuffs with deep-cut folds reproduces the 
Flemish fabrics that were then the vogue, and their all-en- 
veloping, majestic amplitude is also derived from contem- 
porary costumes. The involution, however, is less than in 
some work of the fourteenth century, and the folds are 
not so broken as in Flemish art. By realizing the dignity 
of man and by imbuing the Prophets with a lofty intellectual- 
ity, Sluter ennobled his realism and differentiated it from the 
homely naturalism of the Flemish. | 
The tombs. Two other famous Burgundian monuments, 


THE MIDDLE AGES 237 


now in the Museum at Dijon, are the almost identical tombs 
of Philip the Bold (Fig. 126) and of John the Fearless and 
his wife, Margaret of Bavaria. The former, designed possibly 
by Jean de Marville, was begun by Sluter; but after Sluter’s 
death, the greater part remained to be executed by his 
nephew and to be brought to completion in 1411. The latter 
tomb, ordered from Claus de Werve as early as 1410 and 
probably designed by him, was begun sometime after his 
death by a wandering artist of fortune, the Aragonese, Jean 
de la Huerta, and not finished until 1469, long after the Duke 
John’s decease, by Antoine le Moiturier (d. 1497). The 
tombs in form are more pretentious examples of the type 
employed in St. Denis for the son and brother of St. Louis. 
The mourners are emphasized, and much augmented in num- 
ber. The mourning costume is more conspicuous, and its 
capabilities of variation and gyration in the Burgundian mode 
are ingeniously used to stress the endlessly and wondrously 
differentiated expressions of sorrow, which embody the 
dramatic emotionalism of the school. Like the angel upon the 
well of Champmol who wipes his eye, some of the cortége, 
especially one who blows his nose and another who cleans 
his ears, approach dangerously near to the bourgeois quality 
of Flemish realism. 

Later history of the Burgundian style. After about 1440 
the sculptural production of this school, in Burgundy itself, 
had already begun to languish. The first extant detached 
Entombment or Holy Sepulchre of 1454 at Tonnerre (Fig. 
127) is in a Burgundian style that already inclines somewhat 
towards the mildness of the détente. Except in the Ile-de- 
France, Champagne, and the region of the Loire, however, the 
influence of the Burgundian movement was felt throughout 
the country, particularly in the second half of the fifteenth 
century. 

The School of Paris. Despite the national disasters in 
northern France, the Parisian masters, continuing and devel- 
oping the style of the court of Charles V, still found some em- 
ployment at the first of the century, especially on sepulchres. 
The more essentially religious work of the school is repre- 
sented by one of the loveliest creations of French genius, the 


238 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Coronation of the Virgin, on the castle of La Ferté-Mailon. 
The draperies have the greater amplitude, simplicity, and 
rhythmic flow which developed in the sacred sculpture of 
northern France about 1400 as well as in Burgundy; but here 
and elsewhere in Parisian work, they are less swollen and 
more keen-edged than in Burgundian examples. 
Franco-Flemish work other than Parisian. A long series 
of monuments, extending even into the first half of the six- 


FIG. 127—HOLY SEPULCHRE. HOSPITAL, TONNERRE. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 


teenth century, were produced by French artisans working in 
the Flemish manner by themselves or together with Flemish 
masters. Typical is the relief above the door of the chapel 
of the chateau of Amboise, dating from the end of the fif- 
teenth century and representing St. Christopher and the 
Vision of St. Hubert, in which the stress upon landscape set- 
ting, upon scenic properties, and upon elaborate composition 
is peculiarly Flemish. The choir-stalls provide the most 
characteristic examples of the anecdotal reliefs of the Low 


THE MIDDLE AGES 239 


Countries, because the manipulation of wood was a national 
gift of the Flemings, and their French imitators readily 
adopted their peculiarities. Some few sets had been carved 
in the earlier Gothic period, but they were now multiplied 
from one end of the country to the other. Among the best 
from the second half of the fifteenth century are those of the 
cathedral of Rouen; the superb series of the cathedral of 
Amiens illustrates how, at the first of the sixteenth century, 
a few Renaissance details made their appearance. 

Sculpture leading to the “détente.”’ For the region of the 
Loire, the term détente, or “relaxation,” of realism is a mis- 
nomer, since the asperities of the Burgundian and Flemish 
styles had there found but little favor, and the older tradi- 
tion of French sculpture was uninterrupted. The few speci- 
mens extant from the first three quarters of the fifteenth 
century show that the artists of the Loire continued to work 
in the style of the fourteenth century, but they gradually 
learned to abandon the mannerisms of intricate drapery, 
studied pose, and winsome countenance with which jaded 
idealism during that period had cloaked its ennui, and they 
adopted a mild realism. Among the most notable monuments 
are the statues of feminine saints in the chapel of Chateaudun 
(about 1464) and, in the same manner as these, a St. Cather- 
ine in the Metropolitan Museum (accession no. 07.197). 
Along the Loire, therefore, the mature style of the détente 
at the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth 
centuries was not produced, as in other sections of France, 
by relaxing the harshness of realism and the tumult of 
draperies; it consisted simply in the persistence of the 
gentler esthetic tradition that had prevailed unbroken in 
this district throughout the Gothic period, now slightly mod- 
ernized and taking on more definite local characteristics 
which enable the critic to speak of a unified school. In 
parts of the rest of France, where realism had held sway, 
the tendency to a détente began to assert itself, sporadically, 
as early as the middle of the fifteenth century, in a gradual 
abandonment of the Burgundian and Flemish pecultarities. 
The Burgundian style, for instance, is obviously softened in 
the carvings upon the house of Jacques Coeur at Bourges. 


240 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


5. The Détente 


General characteristics. The détente was a partial return 
to the lofty and simple idealism of the thirteenth century, 
which, indeed, had never been quite eclipsed; but it was only 
a partial return, for its exponents could not be oblivious of 
the intervening conquests of realism. They drew their types 
from actual life, even from popular life, but they ennobled 
them, avoiding the extremes and the eccentricities both of the 
Burgundian and the Flemish schools. The détente manifested 
itself particularly in bewitching feminine figures, and here 
it is easy to recognize the starting point in the French woman 
of the middle or peasant classes. The draperies of the dé- 
tente reacted against the ponderous elaboration of Burgundy 
and the angular pettiness of Flanders towards naturalism and 
a comparative simplicity. ‘The realistic interest was con- 
centrated upon a free adaptation of contemporary costume 
and upon an attention to precise detail rather than upon the 
individualization of figures. Although the Italian Renaissance 
occasionally supplied ornamental details to French monu- 
ments, and although the sculpture of Italy in the Quattro- 
cento afforded certain analogies to the creations of the 
détente, especially in tempered realism, during the fifteenth 
century the foreign style had not sufficiently penetrated 
France or produced enough distinguished examples in the 
country to have had any part in the formation of the move- 
ment. 

Monuments of the Loire. Michel Colombe and his school. 
By the end of the fifteenth century the détente was general 
throughout France, extending even to Burgundy, but its 
centre was the region of the Loire, especially Touraine. One 
of the best specimens of the prolific output of the movement 
in this district is the Holy Sepulchre of the abbey of Soles- 
mes (1496), the architectural setting of which is already 
decked with pilasters of the Renaissance. This justly famous. 
monument has sometimes been ascribed to Michel Colombe, 
the greatest exponent of the détente in Tours, where, though 
he was born at Saint Pol-de-Léon in Brittany about 1480, 
he had set up his shop at least as early as 1473. His only 


THE MIDDLE AGES 241 


undoubtedly authentic works that are extant were done in his 
old age. His greatest achievement was begun in 1502, the 
tomb of Francis II of Brittany and his wife, now in the 
cathedral of Nantes (Fig. 128). Both the material, white 
marbie, and the architectural decoration are Italian; and the 


FIG. 128—cOLOMBE. TOMB OF FRANCIS II OF BRITTANY. CATHEDRAL, 
NANTES 


painter, Jean Perréal, who seems to have designed the 
monument, superimposed certain Italian items upon the 
French sepulchral iconography—the twelve apostles in niches 
on the longer sides and detached statues of the four cardinal 
Virtues at the corners, which had hitherto not been admitted 
to French tombs. The mourners had to be relegated to rows 


242 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


of smaller medallions beneath the tier of the Apostles and 
other saints. The actual execution of the design, by Michel 
Colombe and his pupils, is thoroughly French, and constitutes 
the most beautiful expression of the détente. His only other 
certain work, with the exception of a medal for Louis XII, 
is the marble panel of St. George and the Dragon done in 
1508 or 1509 and now in the Louvre. After his death between 
1512 and 1519, his style lived on through the first quarter 
of the century with almost undimmed loveliness in the 
hands of his immediate followers. Among these, the only one 
who can be absolutely connected with a definite monument is 
his nephew, Guillaume Reg- 
nault, the author of the 
recumbent forms of Louis 
Poncher and his wife, Rob- 
erte Legendre, for the 
tomb of which the frag- 
ments have been gathered 
in the Louvre. The appeal 
of the movement is perhaps 
felt most irresistibly in a 
series of Virgins, the best of 
which, worthy of Michel 
Colombe himself, is the 
Vierge d’Olivet in the 
Louvre. 

The “‘détente” in the rest 
of France. School of Cham- 
pagne. In other regions 
, the détente was probably 
FIG. 129—sT. ANNE AND _ VIRGIN. evolved through a sponta- 

CATHEDRAL, BORDEAUX neous evolution and not 
necessarily through the in- 

fluence of Touraine. The multiplicity of examples are all 
so lovely that it is hard to select any one for special mention. 
Certainly no other is more alluring than the group of St. 
Anne and the Virgin in the cathedral of Bordeaux (Fig. 129), 
a theme that was very popular during the détente because its 
sweet domesticity accorded with the spirit of the movement. 


4 


THE MIDDLE AGES 243 


Another instance of this 
subject, also produced by 
some master of the détente, 
may be seen in the Metro- 
politan Museum (accession 
no. 16.32.31). The same 
Museum possesses further 
characteristic examples of 
the movement in a Holy 
Sepulchre and a Pieta from 
the Chateau de Biron. It 
was Champagne, however, 
that in the first quarter of 
the sixteenth century har- 
bored the most significant 
school of the détente, out- 
side of Touraine. Its high- 
est achievements, almost 
Hellenic in their purity of 
taste and intimate idealism, 
were produced by the 
atelrer de la Ste. Marthe, so 
called from one of the de- 
finitive statues of the work- 
shop, a St. Martha in the 
church of the Magdalene at 
Troyes. The masterpieces 
of the atelier are two Holy 
Sepulchres at Chaource and 
Villeneuve - l’Archevéque. 
The utterly captivating 
statue of a feminine saint 
in the Museum at Prince- 
ton (Fig. 130) belongs to 
the same period and _ per- 
haps to the same workshop. 
The drapery in the school 


FIG. 130—FEMININE SAINT. MUSEUM, 
PRINCETON. (COURTESY OF PROFESSOR 
ALLAN MARQUAND) 


of Champagne soon began to assume studied complication 
through the influence of Flanders or of advancing Italianism; 


244 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


and although sculptural activity continued here unabated, 
the French style of the détente succumbed before the con- 
quests of the Renaissance. 


C. THE LOW COUNTRIES 


The thirteenth century. Throughout the thirteenth and 
for the first two-thirds of the fourteenth century, the sculp- 
ture of Belgium continued to be chiefly an offshoot of the pro- 
duction of France. Even when the later vandalism of: the 
Protestants is taken into account, the small amount of monu- 
mental plastic decoration that remains indicates that it was 
here never so enthusiastically cultivated. Of the thirteenth 
century, the two principal examples are the sacred figures 
in the lowest row upon the facade of the cathedral of Tournai 
(if these are not rather to be assigned to the early fourteenth 
century) and the rather provincial double tympanum of the. 
Hospital of St. John at Bruges. The proximity of Holland 
and of the banks of the Meuse to Germany introduced a 
Teutonic strain into the sculpture of this region during the 
Gothic as during the Romanesque period. The great south 
portal of St. Servatius at Maastricht belongs to the group 
that in the early thirteenth century comprises such doors as 
those of Freiberg and Minster. 

The fourteenth century. Belgium and Holland did not ex- 
hibit signs of the oncoming realism earlier than other coun- 
tries. If the phenomenon was to manifest itself anywhere, 
it might be looked for first in an attempt at portraiture in 
sepulchral effigies, but an unprejudiced eye fails to discern it 
in the Flemish tombs either of the thirteenth century or of 
the first seventy years of the fourteenth. Nor does the 
monumental decoration of the fourteenth century, the chief 
extant specimen of which is the somewhat Teutonic Bethle- 
hem portal of Notre Dame at Huy, proceed any farther along 
the road towards realism than the contemporary work of 
France. The usual mannered Virgin of the fourteenth century 
may be illustrated, in an extreme aspect, by the statue in the 
Baptismal Chapel of the cathedral of Antwerp. Even the | 


THE MIDDLE AGES 245 


late and peculiarly French types of realism at the end of the 
fourteenth and beginning of the fifteenth centuries were 
sporadically imitated in the Low Countries: the Franco- 
Flemish manner of Beauneveu and the Parisian milieu, for 
instance, by the superb St. Catherine of Notre Dame at 
Courtrai; the Burgundian manner by the Virgin on the south 
portal of Notre Dame at Hal. 

Flemish realism of the fifteenth century. Realism was not, 
then, a creation of the Low Countries; but the tendency that 
manifested itself everywhere in Europe in the fifteenth cen- 
tury also assumed in Flanders a peculiarly Flemish form. In- 
stead of large and impressive statues, the Flemish mind found 
satisfaction in little figures, multiplied, on the screens and 
retables, into the familiar crowds of the streets, repeated on 
the portals with that addiction to rhythms of small objects at 
short intervals which is characteristic of the art of the Low 
Countries. The postures and gestures of the figures were 
adopted from the ordinary sights of every-day experience. 
The draperies were broken into numerous small and compli- 
cated divisions in contrast to the great sweeping expanses of 
Burgundy. The sculptors carried their realism so far as to 
call into service also the resources usually considered peculiar 
to painting. The pictorial accessories of landscape and ar- 
chitecture were freely introduced; pictorial perspective was 
occasionally attempted, with the more remote forms dimin- 
ished in size; the groups were arranged in pictorial composi- 
tions; and the artists permitted themselves a violence of ges- 
ture and movement that is commonly deemed inconsistent 
with the mediums of sculpture. The commercial environment 
made the plastic art an industry. The producers were shops 
with their trade-marks rather than individual artists con- 
scious of their high calling. The articles manufactured were 
sold broadcast throughout Europe—the sepulchral slabs of 
Tournai, the metal-work of Dinant, the wooden retables of 
Brabant and Antwerp. Wood, indeed, was the favorite Flem- 
ish medium because of the greater ease with which it could be 
exported. 

Sepulchral sculpture. At the end of the fourteenth and 
commencement of the fifteenth century, when the Low Coun- 


246 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


tries begin to shake off their esthetic dependence upon 
France and Germany, the first signs of realism may be dis- 
cerned in a peculiar kind of epitaph manufactured at Tournai 
but soon imitated by the craftsmen of other towns. In these 
reliefs, for the well established effigies of the saints, the sculp- 
tor naturally clung to the old traditions of his shop, but the 
figures of the dead, whether actual or imaginary portraits, 
offered opportunity for the cultivation of the new realism. 


71G. 131—epPiTAPH OF ROBERT DE QUINGHIEN. MUSEUM, TOURNAI. (PHOTO. 
PHONO-PHOTO, TOURNAT) 


An interesting example is afforded by the emtaph of the 
canon de Quinghien (1429) in the Museum of Tournai, per- 
haps by the great painter, Roger van der Weyden (Fig. 131). 
For the sepulchral monuments in bronze it has usually been 
considered that Jacques de Gérines of Brussels (active 1392- 
1463) was one of those most in requisition, but there are 
some who would now make him only a caster of others’ 
models. His monument of Louis de Male at Lille perished in 
the French Revolution, but extant drawings of the accom- 


panying statuettes, representing the members of the Burgun- 


THE MIDDLE AGES 247 


dian ducal family, make it possible to identify the ten bronze 
figures now in the Ryks Museum of Amsterdam as designed 
for this tomb, although replaced by others, or as executed by 
Jacques de Gérines for some other destination in an identical 
style. They are among the most appealing examples of 
Flemish realism, especially the feminine effigies, and suggest 
vividly the painted portraits of Jan van Eyck. 


FIG. 132—ROOD-SCREEN, ST. GOMMARIUS, LIERRE. (PHOTO. BECKER) 


Ecclesiastical furniture. The principal ecclesiastical dec- 
oration of the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries consisted 
in the application of small figures and especially small scenes 
from sacred story in large numbers to elaborately wrought 
articles of religious furniture. Characteristic specimens are: 
the screen of the sixteenth century at Lierre (Fig. 132), the 
tabernacle in St. Jacques, Louvain, and the choir-stalls of Ste. 
Gertrude at Louvain and of the church at Breda. 

The retables. The Flemish retable was divided into a 


248 A HISTORY. OF SCULPTURE 


number of compartments, side by side or sometimes also 
one above the other. The compartments were occupied by 
crowds of figures in animated episodes and were covered by 
canopies of luxuriant Gothic lacework. To give the impres- 
sion of actual human beings, the figures were usually de- 
tached in the round. The commonest themes were the Passion 
of Our Lord and the life of the Virgin. In the last quarter of 
the fifteenth century Brussels and Antwerp became busy em- 
poriums for the manufacture and exportation of retables. 
The greatest carver of these objects in the former city was 
Jan Borreman (active c. 1479-1522), whose chief extant re- 
table in Belgium, now in the Musée du Cinquantenaire at 
Brussels, embodies the legend of the tortures of St. George 
(Fig. 133). A weaker sensibility to beauty of form, to exist- 
ence in three dimensions, and to correctness of modelling 
differentiated the products of Antwerp from the masterpieces 
of Brussels. The panels were more crowded with actors, 
violence of posture often degenerated into frenzy and homeli- 
ness of gesture into vulgarity, the drapery was thrown into 
a seething mass, the figures and their frames are heavy be- 
neath gaudy color and lavished gold. It must be remem- 
bered, however, that the great majority of the examples come 
from a later period than the best work of Brussels, from the 
very end of the fifteenth and the first half of the sixteenth 
century, when the qualities of Flemish sculpture in general 
were exaggerated. The earlier retables of Antwerp, such as 
that in the church of Ste. Materne, Tongres, betray only 
premonitions of extravagance. 

Holland. Mention has already been made of two or three 
monuments in Holland connected with the general Flemish 
development. The Dutch critic, Pit, would discern in other 
monuments from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries cer- 
tain slightly differentiated national traits—heavier but sim- 
pler draperies, the familiar Dutch cast of countenance, a still 
further accentuation of the homely realism characteristic of 
the whole region of the Low Countries. Such works as the 
Epiphany of the Episcopal Museum at Haarlem or the 
Visitation and organ panels of the Ryks Museum at Amster- 


(SNVNTUWNGd ‘0 ‘YW JO ASALYNOD) 
‘STUSSONUA “AYIVNALNVOONIO aad qaSOW ‘aDuOUD «LS WO ATEVLHHY dO NOILOES IVHLNGO “NVWaYHHOd NVr—Eeey] ‘Old 


250 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


dam foreshadow the great Dutch genre painting of the seven- 
teenth century. 


D. GERMANY AND RELATED COUNTRIES 
1. Introduction 


General characteristics. The Romanesque plastic style of 
Germany might, of itself, have developed into Gothic; but, 
as a matter of fact, there was a new importation of Gallic 
influences, and in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, 
German sculpture was dependent upon French, though with 
very pronounced national traits. Throughout its history 
Gothic sculpture in Germany was more realistic than in any 
other country of Europe. In the thirteenth century it was less 
idealistic; in the century of realism, the fifteenth, it out- 
Heroded Herod. From the first there existed a tendency 
to greater expressiveness, which finally degenerated into emo- 
tional extravagance. A certain restlessness permeated even 
the drapery. Already agitated in the early Gothic period, it 
subsided in the developed art of the thirteenth century, but 
it ended in the fifteenth century by committing the wildest 
and .most capricious excesses. Compensation for this rela- 
tive lack of taste may be sought in the energetic strength of 
the figures and in a technical skill that occasionally surpasses: 
the attainments of other Europeans. 

The style of the thirteenth century. The greater realism 
and expressiveness, the livelier postures and draperies, par- 
tially destroyed the architectural lines that were still pre- 
served in the carvings of France. The realistic proclivity in- 
troduced into the sculpture of religious edifices more secular 
matter than was admitted in France, especially effigies of the 
noble founders of the churches. The subject of the Wise and 
Foolish Virgins enjoyed a peculiar popularity as a compro- 
mise between the sacred and the profane. The great centres 
of monumental Gothic sculpture were Saxony and the ad- 
jacent districts in the contiguous provinces, particularly 
Westphalia and Franconia. 


THE MIDDLE AGES 251 


2. The Transition 


The more national monuments. At the end of the twelfth 
and beginning of the thirteenth century, in a series of ex- 
amples, chiefly stucco or stone choir-screens, it is possible to 
observe that gradual infusion of German Romanesque forms 
with naturalism which might have ended in Gothic without 
foreign interference, if the importation of the new style from 
France had not stunted the movement. The crossing of the 
legs, the twisted or spiral folds, the coupling of the sacred 
personages in conversation, suggest that these sculptures owe 
something to Romanesque France, but they certainly owe as 
much to the ivories of Byzantium, which, because of relations 
between Germany and the court at Constantinople, continued 
in the twelfth century to exercise a potent influence. With 
the transitional French school of Chartres there is not neces- 
sarily any connection. The principal monument, slightly 
later than the others, is the stone screen of the cathedral of 
Bamberg, the masters of which have already achieved or 
adumbrated the typical qualities of German sculpture in the 
thirteenth century. The varied postures and gestures of the 
sinewy figures are dramatic and intense; the realistic cast of 
the features is frankly Teutonic; and the folds of the gar- 
ments are restlessly contorted. In the same cathedral, the 
door of the northeast tower, the tympanum of which repre- 
sents the donation of the church by the sainted king, Henry 
II, and his queen, Kunigunde, is still very Romanesque and 
similar in style, although the mood and the draperies are less 
vehement and the date is probably later. On the columns at 
the left of the Portal of the Princes, at least the majority 
of the Apostles and the Prophets would also seem to belong to 
the earlier workshop of Bamberg. 

The French influence. Intermediate between this move- 
ment and the fully developed style of the thirteenth century 
lies another large group of monuments in which, generally 
speaking, the Byzantine and Romanesque elements are fewer 
and less pronounced, the familiar earmarks of Gothic more 
apparent, and the influence of early French Gothic is clearly 


252 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


perceptible. The examples date usually from the first third 
of the century. The most celebrated representative of this 
group is the Goldene Pforte of the cathedral at Freiberg (Fig. 
134), really the first great portal of German Gothic, the 
elaborate iconographical scheme of which was suggested by 
the monuments of the Ile-de-France. The slim types of 


FIG. 134—FREIBERG. GOLDENE PFORTE. (PHOTO. DR. FR. STOEDTNER, BERLIN) 


Romanesque sculpture are replaced in the tympanum and in 
the larger statues below by more substantial German figures, 
impressive in their solid and practical piety; the primitive 
formalism of drapery has given way to much freedom and 
flowing grace. The more provincial artisans who executed 
(with the exception of five later statues) the south portal of 
Munster in Westphalia were ruder workmen than their Saxon 
brothers. 


THE MIDDLE AGES 253 


3. The Developed Style of the Thirteenth Century 


Classification in schools. The mature sculpture that dates 
from the last two-thirds of the thirteenth century may be di- 
vided into two broad classes: the Saxon, more directly related 


FIG. 185—sST. GEORGE (?). CATHEDRAL, BAMBERG. (PHOTO. DR. FR. 
STOEDTNER, BERLIN) 


to the previous carvings of the province, more German in 
temper, and, in the midst of the general French influence, 
often revealing a particular dependence upon Reims; and 
the Rhenish, produced by a more immediate but far from 
servile study of French models, especially those of Paris 
and of the lateral portals of Chartres. 

The Saxon group. Bamberg, though not absolutely in 


254 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Saxon territory, affords the best illustration of a connection 
with Reims. The sculpture of the cathedral that belongs to 
this period includes: on the Portal of the Princes, the alle- 
gorical figures of the Church and the Synagogue, the Apostles 
and Prophets on the columns at the right, and the tympanum; 


FIG. 136—EKKEHARD AND UTA. WEST CHOIR, CATHEDRAL, NAUMBURG. 
(PHOTO. DR. FR. STOEDTNER, BERLIN) 


the Portal of Adam in the southeast tower; and a series of 
statues within the church. Of numerous instances of a rela- 
tionship so direct that it 1s necessary to assume that the 
artists of Bamberg spent a long-period of apprenticeship at 
Reims, the following must suffice to prove the point: the 
Church and the Synagogue, derived from the similar per- 
sonifications beside the rose-window of the south transept at 


THE MIDDLE AGES 259 


Reims; the superb equestrian statue of St. George (St. 
Stephen of Hungary or Conrad III?) (Fig. 135) in the 
interior, suggested by a young standing King on the exterior 
of the north transept of Reims; and the group of the Visita- 
tion, also inside the church, imitating the antiquarian style 
of the identical subject on the central door of the French ca- 
thedral. The very parallelism between these two supreme 
examples of two nations’ art throws into stronger relief their 
differences. In the German figures a higher degree of individ- 
ualization and an almost tragic intensity are distinctly evi- 
dent. The general reliance upon German types of humanity 
may be gauged by comparing the Marys of the two Visita- 
tions. The greater size and weight of the Teutonic bodies 
appear to best advantage in the Church and the Synagogue, 
who possess the heroic beauty of Valkyrs. Germanic techni- 
cal skill here reaches its acme in the delineation of the dia- 
phanous fabrics and the lovely feminine forms emerging 
everywhere beneath them. The best known production of Sax- 
ony itself is found in the twelve statues of benefactors of the 
cathedral in the west choir of Naumburg (Fig. 136). Though 
not strictly portraits, they are the most imposing instances of 
powerful individualization in the thirteenth century. The 
masculine figures are more forceful than attractive, the strain- 
ing after expressiveness has rarely proved successful, but 
one or two of the women, especially the Markgrafin Uta, have 
true physical and spiritual beauty. 

The Rhenish group. For the sculpture of this period the 
most important monument on the Rhine is the cathedral of 
Strassburg. To the first half and middle of the century 
belong the Church, the Synagogue, and two tympana with the 
Death (Fig. 137) and Coronation of the Virgin on the portal 
of the south transept, and within the south transept a pier 
adorned with the participants in the Last Judgment arranged 
in three tiers. Since the sculptors of these works must have 
been actually educated among the masters who in the thir- 
teenth century executed the carvings of Chartres and Paris, 
their productions possess slimmer proportions and greater re- 
finement, elegance, and simplicity than those of their Saxon 
rivals. Occasionally, however, as in the Death of the Virgin, 


256 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


a.poignant intensity suggests the German strain. The wealth 
of sculpture on the triple portal of the west facade, dating 
from the end of the thirteenth and the beginning of the next 
century, not only exhibits the characteristic traits of the later 
period but also reverts to physical types that are more essen- 
tially Teutonic. 


FIG. 137—DEATH OF THE VIRGIN, PORTAL OF SOUTH TRANSEPT, CATHEDRAL, 
STRASSBURG. (FROM DEHIO AND VON BEZOLD, “DIE DENKMALER DER 
DEUTSCHEN BILDHAUERKUNST’”) 


The tombs. In distinction from the practice in France, the 
effigy was still executed in relief much more commonly than 
in the round. As already in the Romanesque period it was 
sometimes represented as if in a kind of open stone box, 
sometimes was left unframed. Occasionally the bases of the 
monuments were very low. The tomb of Duke Henry 
IV of. Silesia in the Kreuz-Kirche at Breslau exemplifies the 
class of Gothic sepulchre in which the figure is placed upon a 
high base carved with the ceremony of the obsequies. It is 
surprising, when one remembers the architectural statues of 
the period, that there was little more attempt at portraiture 


THE MIDDLE AGES 257 


than in France. Some individualization may perhaps be here 
and there discerned, for instance, in the tomb of Henry the 
Lion and his duchess at Brunswick, but this belongs to a 
small group that differ in a more essential respect from French 
examples: the extraordinarily free and ample draperies have 
the agitation that has been noted in the architectural sculp- 
ture of the transition from Romanesque to Gothic, with which 
the mortuary series is probably contemporary. These sepul- 
chres are exceptional in Germany also because they begin to 
recognize the recumbent posture. 


4. The Fourteenth Century 


Monumental sculpture. In Germany, as elsewhere, the 
local divergences that we have observed in the thirteenth cen- 
tury were effaced, and everywhere the single international 
style was employed, which Germany joined with the other 
countries of Europe in borrowing from France. The greater 
individualization of the personages that had been the distinc- 
tion of Germany in the thirteenth century was abandoned 
for fixed types, which differed from the French only in the 
choice of Teutonic features. The wonderful use of the gar- 
ments to define the character and thought of the figure was 
sacrificed to the familiar amplification and undulation. The 
small scenes from sacred narrative often exhibit the proclivity 
for homely realism that in the next century was to become so 
characteristic of Germany. Saxony and the north in general, 
with the exception of the region of the Rhine, resigned the 
important role that they had hitherto played in the history 
of sculpture. Here and there indigenous tendencies put in 
a timid appearance amidst the universal style. The Christ, 
Virgin, and Apostles on the pillars of the choir of the cathe- 
dral at Cologne are distinguished by the expression of mys- 
tical intensity so characteristic of the art of this city. The 
portals of the cathedral of Ulm are among the chief monu- 
ments of Swabia, where already there began to manifest itself 
that tendency towards softness and sentiment which was 
to develop into a kind of détente. Nuremberg is very rich in 


258 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


sculpture of the fourteenth century, and it was amidst the 
vigorous civic life of this town that indigenous qualities es- 
pecially declared themselves. The heads of the heroes from 
the Schoner Brunnen, now in the Museum of Nuremberg, 
have more reality than was common at the period; the seated 
Apostles of terracotta, six in the Museum and four in the 
church of St. James, are strongly individualized; the sacred 


FIG. 138—(READING FROM LEFT TO RIGHT) TOMBS OF ALBERT VON HOHEN- 
LOHE, CATHEDRAL, WURZBURG; KONRAD VON WEINSBERG, CATHEDRAL, 
MAYENCE; GERHARD VON SCHWARZBURG, CATHEDRAL, WURZBURG. (FROM 
DEHIO AND VON BEZOLD, “DIE DENKMALER DER DEUTSCHEN BILDPAUER- 
KUNST’) 


narrative in the tympana of the churches of St. Sebaldus and 
of St. Lawrence is related with Teutonic bonhomie. Germany 
has also her mannered and often charming Madonnas of the 
fourteenth century. Typical specimens may be seen in St. 
Gereon, Cologne, and (with the three Magi) on a pier of the 
cathedral of Wiirzburg. | 

The tombs. The sepulchral monuments now greatly in- 
creased in number. Already in the fourteenth century, the 


THE MIDDLE AGES 259 


simple slab was occasionally exalted from its former place 
on the pavement to an upright position on the wall. For the 
ordinary high base there were now sometimes substituted four 
pillars, or more rarely two vertical planes or the bodies of 
lions, so that the tomb looks like a table upholding the 
efigy. Now and then, on the floor beneath the table, was 
placed another slab with another effigy. So in the Wilhelmer- 
Kirche at Strassburg, the canon Philipp von Werd is repre- 
sented beneath his brother, Count Ulrich. Although the 
figure was sometimes enclosed in a kind of case and some- 
times was left unframed, in many other instances it was 
surrounded by Gothic architectural detail, giving the effect 
of a body ensconced in a shrine, occasionally with statuettes 
in the lateral sections or with a projecting baldacchino above 
the head. In other examples the Gothic ornament was com- 
bined with the old casing. The development of portraiture 
earlier than in the rest of Europe betokens the reassertion of 
the German spirit (Fig. 138). 


6. The Fifteenth and Early Sixteenth Centuries 


General characteristics. In Germany, the realism typical 
of the period was more accentuated and brutal. The rise of 
the people in the great industrial towns to the position of 
patrons often gave it a tone that was perhaps even more 
bourgeois than in the Low Countries. The general German 
tendency to excess transformed grace into affectation, over- 
loaded the monuments with ornament, and exaggerated the 
expressiveness of face and body. Although the Germans were 
seldom able to attain genuine dramatic power, they fre- 
quently infused the figures, especially in the school of Swabia, 
with intense and even tragic feeling. ‘The European epidemic 
of complicated drapery reached an alarming stage, partly 
through a desire for pronounced pictorial effects of chiar- 
oscuro. The nature of the favorite material of the age, wood, 
played its part also in breaking up the drapery into small, 
brittle, knotty folds, often intersecting in confused patterns; 
and the peculiarities of wood were either transferred to other 
mediums or appeared there spontaneously. At the beginning 
of the sixteenth century, such men as Riemenschneider were 


260 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


‘inclined to return to a more orderly and dignified arrange- 
ment of longer folds, but between these folds the old disease 
still retained a certain hold. The late Gothic of Germany, 
especially in its love of display and pictorial effect, may be 
conceived as the baroque stage of early Gothic; and though it 
has the defects of the baroque, it also has the merits of the 
style, a compelling emotional abandon and an impressive 
grandiloquence. The plastic output may be divided into two 
great geographical groups, the northern and the southern. 
The former was largely dependent upon the Low Countries. 
The latter, though here and there subject to foreign influence, 
was thoroughly German and far more significant. 

The retables. The essentially German retable was evolved 
in the south. The centre is occupied by a large box, usually 
rectangular (Schrewn), containing the representation of a 
sacred scene, a row of sacred personages, or a combination 
of both motifs. The space of the Schrein is sometimes divided 
into a horizontal series of large compartments, but in the 
south the vertical superimposition of one compartment upon 
another is very rare. The Schrein is flanked by single. 
(sporadically double) wings, which ordinarily open and shut. 
The painted subjects connected with the main theme of the 
Schrein, with which it seems to have been the earlier custom 
to decorate the wings, are often replaced by carved reliefs, 
which may be single large representations or, much more 
rarely, a set of smaller representations or figures side by side 
or above one another. Over the Schrein rises an elaboraté 
Gothic structure of florid turrets and open-work, enclosing 
statues or even scenes. The retables of northern Germany 
imitate the Flemish. | : 

Northern Germany. In the north it is only the retables 
that have any universal significance. The greatest centres for 
their manufacture were Calcar on the lower Rhine and 
Liibeck in the Hanseatic region. The two chief names are 
Heinrich Douwermann (active 1510-1544), whose altarpieces 
may be seen at Calcar, Cleve, and Xanten, and Hans Brigge- 
mann (c. 1480-c. 1540), who, in his celebrated retable now in 
the cathedral of Schleswig, realized more than his rivals the 
stockier and ruder German type of humanity. 


THE MIDDLE AGES 261 


Southern Germany 


Francona. The School of Nuremberg. The sculpture of 
Franconia was distinguished by passionate intensity and a 
pronounced love of the dramatic. Of the two principal 
artistic cities, Nuremberg and Wurzburg, the former was 
the more important. The two greatest sculptors of Nurem- 
berg who still belonged essentially to the Middle Ages 


FIG. 139—vEIT STOSS. DEATH AND ASSUMPTION OF THE VIRGIN. ST: 
MARY’S, CRACOW. (PHOTO. LANGEWIESCHE) 


were Veit Stoss and Adam Krafft. Not only do critics dis- 
~ agree about the date of the former’s birth, which is set even 
as early as 1431, but the place itself is in dispute, since 
both Poles and Germans claim him as a fellow-countryman. 
Certain it is that he was active at Cracow from 1477 to 1496 
and at Nuremberg from 1496 until his death in 1533. The 
main elements of his art, in any case, seem to have been 
evolved from precedents in the latter city. His powerful in- 
dividuality vented itself in the dramatic force and harsh 


262 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


‘realism of his personages. The perturbation of the forms is 
transmitted to the draperies, which are pulled, wound, and 
broken into the most tumultuous shapes and are often tossed 
up over or beside the body in arbitrary swirls. Among his 
most characteristic achievements are the Death and Assump- 


FIG. 140—KRAFFT. STATIONS OF THE CROSS. GERMANIC MUSEUM, NUREM- 
BERG. (FROM DEHIO AND VON BEZOLD, “DIE DENKMALER DER DEUTSCHEN 
BILDHAUERKUNST’’) 


tion of the Virgin, the Schrein of his first great retable, in 
St. Mary’s, Cracow (Fig. 139), and the Annunciation, the 
centre of the great Rosary hung over the choir of St. Law- 
rence at Nuremberg. Essentially a wood-carver, he used the 
deep cuttings of that material in the few instances where he 


THE MIDDLE AGES 263 


tried his hand at stone, as in the reliefs from the Passion in 
the choir of St. Sebaldus. The somewhat calmer mood of his 
late period is well illustrated by the altarpiece of 1523 in the 
Pfarrkirche at Bamberg, in which the slightly more classical 
drapery may indicate the only trace of an influence that the 
Renaissance exerted upon him. Adam Krafft (between 1455 
and 1460-1509) differed both in medium and temperament 
from Veit Stoss. Active only at Nuremberg, he had the al- 
most unique distinction, at this period, of confining himself 
to the old Gothic material of stone. Trained possibly in the 
more placid school of Ulm, he refrained from Stoss’s emo- 
tional extravagances. Although he does not characterize so 
powerfully, his realism is more sincere. He is less imagina- 
tive, but at the same time he does not seek effect. through 
mannerisms. He could not disentangle himself completely 
from the contemporary meshes of drapery, but partially be- 
cause he felt in stone rather than in wood, his folds are 
much simpler than those of Stoss and better accommodated to 
the bodies. His modelling is more summary and the pro- 
portions are not always correct, but the postures are likely 
to possess more naturalistic ease, and the compositions hold 
together more tightly. The culmination of his career is em- 
bodied in the restored seven Stations of the Cross (1505), 
six of which are now in the Germanic Museum, Nuremberg 
(Fig. 140), and replaced, on the road to St. John’s Cemetery, 
where they originally stood, by modern copies. The other 
relief of the seven, the Fourth Station, representing the en- 
counter with St. Veronica, is built into the wall of a house 
on the Burgschmiet-Strasse. His-ciborium in the church of 
St. Lawrence, with its multiplied and highly wrought details, 
established a precedent for these articles of ecclesiastical 
furniture in southern Germany. 

Francona. The School of Wiirzburg. The other great 
Franconian school of Wiirzburg centres about Tilman Rie- 
menschneider (1468?-1531), equally successful both in stone 
and wood. His magnificent series of sepulchral monuments, 
most impressive among which is that of Bishop Rudolf von 
Scherenburg in the cathedral, shows that he had Franconian 
realism at his disposal; but when not dominated by the neces- 


264 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


sity of portraiture, in his religious pieces he fell into lyric 
strains that he may have learned in Swabia. Neither in sin- 
gle figures nor in compositions was he a dramatist. His talent 
lay in another direction. He infuses his countenances with a 
dreamy, melancholy poetry, and, so far as was possible for 
a German of the late Gothic period, he had, like the artists of 
Swabia, a feeling for ideal beauty. In contrast to the more 
robust forms of Nuremberg, 
his canon was a slim and 
graceful body, with dispro- 
portionately long legs. The 
style of Riemenschneider at 
its best may be studied in 
the Adam and Eve now in 
the collection of the His- 
torical Society, Wurzburg 
(Fig. 141), in the retable 
of the Holy Blood in St. 
James at Rothenburg, in 
the Madonna of the Stadel 
Art Institute, Frankfort, 
and in the bust of a youth- 
ful saint belonging to the 
Altman Collection of the 
Metropolitan Museum. 
FIG. 141—RIEMENSCHNEIDER. HEAD OF ae pec re 
ADAM. HISTORICAL SOCIETY, WURZ- Swabia, though less cele- 
BURG. (PHOTO. DR. FR. STOEDTNER, brated than that of Fran- 
BERLIN) conia, possessed distinct 
merits of its own. In 
contrast to the agitation and drama of its rival, it cultivated 
restfulness and the expression of deep but not passionate 
feeling, sometimes through restrained gestures but chiefly 
only through the countenance. The forceful and profoundly 
realistic individualization of Franconia must not be usually 
expected. In compensation the drapery is not so hard and 
broken, but flows in fuller folds. In its tranquillity the art 
of Swabia corresponds to the art of the Loire in France, and if 
its style had spread, a general détente might have occurred. 


THE MIDDLE AGES 265 


The greatest and most essentially Swabian centre was Ulm. 
The outstanding master of the fifteenth century was Jorg 
Syrlin the Elder (c. 1430-1491), who was able to achieve 
a most happy compromise between the peacefulness of the 
Swabian school and realistic expression. Of his few docu- 
mented works, the most important are the choir-stalls of the 
cathedral of Ulm, like most other south German examples, 
less overladen with ornament and figures than those of the 
Low Countries or northern Germany. Though some would 
degrade him into a mere carver of ornament, he probably 
planned the ‘whole 
series, and executed 
with his own hand 
at least the Sages 
and Sibyls (Fig. 
142). 

Bavaria. The 
presence of quarries 
of limestone and red 
marble in Bavaria 
gave greater popu- 
larity to these ma- 
terials than to wood. 
The most striking 
examples are anumM- fpycg. 142—JsGRG SYRLIN THE ELDER.  SIBYL. 
ber of sepulchral CHOIR-STALLS, CATHEDRAL, ULM. (PHOTO. DR. 
slabs in Munich and FR. STOEDTNER, BERLIN ) 
other Bavarian 
towns, with the usual unsparing German characterization. A 
superb specimen, in St. Peter’s church, Munich, was finished in 
1482 for Ulrich Aresinger by Erasmus Grasser (c. 1450-after 
1526), who appears to have had some slight contact with the 
Venetian Renaissance. To him have been ascribed, with the 
collaboration of at least one other sculptor, the stalls of the 
Frauen-Kirche at Munich (1502), the figures of which are 
livelier in attitude and more penetrating in characterization 
than the similar productions of Swabia. Both these quali- 
ties are purposely carried into the realm of caricature in 
his ten statuettes of lithe morris-dancers on the corbels of 


266 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the great hall of the Old Rathaus (1480). The best known 
wood-carvings of Bavaria, the Christ, Virgin, and Apostles of 
the church at Blutenburg near Munich (1496), are more 
praiseworthy for their appreciation of ideal beauty and for 
the comparative freedom of their majestically conceived dra- 
peries from the ordinary German conventions than for con- 
vincing lifelikeness or skilful modelling. 

The Middle and Upper Rhine. The foreigner, Nicolaus 
Gerhaert of Leyden (d. 1487), imported into this region a 
brilliant and impressive style, the great influence of which 
upon south-German sculpture is just beginning to be appre- 
ciated. This style, which resembles that of the workshop of 
Dijon almost at its best, seems to have been produced by the 
same esthetic traditions in the Low Countries that had 
helped to form Claus Sluter, and it is even possible that Ger- 
haert had visited Burgundy. His earliest known signed work 
(1462), the sepulchral slab of the Archbishop Jacob von 
Sierck in the Diocesan Museum, Tréves, is already distin- 
guished by Sluter’s vitalized drapery and spiritualized real- 
ism. The busts of a Sibyl and a Prophet from a door of the 
Chancery at Strassburg, though destroyed in the siege of 
i870, may still be seen in casts in the Maison de Notre Dame 
of the same city; the original head of the Prophet has lately 
come to light and is now in the Municipal Museum. Gerhaert 
ended a life of unusually widespread activity in the employ 
of the emperor, Frederick III, executing, with the aid of pu- 
pils, the monument of the sovereign himself, now in the cathe- 
dral of Vienna, the last word in the profuse elaboration of the 
sepulchral type that appears in the ducal tombs at Dijon. 


E. ENGLAND 


General characteristics. Partly because the stone-cutters 
were unable to define their figures strongly and crisply or rid 
them of apathy and partly because their statuary seldom rose 
above the level of respectable shop-work, English Gothic 
sculpture generally lacked the vibrant life and distinction 
of continental carving. How much the plastic art of Gothic 
England owed in its origins to France is a problem. It is 


THE MIDDLE AGES 267 


difficult, at least, to follow insular patriotism so far as to 
deny to the earlier appearing monumental sculpture of France 
anything but the influence of example. The stylistic parallel- 
isms are too close. Indigenous characteristics are, of course, 
to be discerned, some of them inherited from the Romanesque 
period. A notable difference, during the thirteenth century, 
is found in the place assigned to the carvings. English Gothic 
developed no great portals upon which to lavish sculpture; 
only the tympana were occasionally decorated with one or 
more little reliefs in frames, and rarely a few statues were 
set at the sides. Some of the great screens that form the 
peculiar English facades were elaborately adorned with tiers 
of statues and reliefs; but the spandrels of arches and other 
sections of the interiors, to a larger extent than in the rest 
of Europe, provided fields for plastic embellishment. 

The transition. The style that was transitional from Ro- 
manesque to Gothic is best represented in England by the 
statues of Apostles and Prophets in the Museum at York, 
originally belonging to a portal in the ruined abbey of St. 
Mary. The figures have stepped forth into full plastic 
roundness and have already achieved nobility and differen- 
tiation of type, ease of posture, and sober grace of drapery. 
Certain factors suggest that the new manner at York was 
developed, not spontaneously or on the precedent of the 
school of Chartres, but through a knowledge of the Portico de 
la Gloria at Gompostela acquired in a pilgrimage to the shrine 
or in working along the Way of St. James. 

The developed style of the thirteenth century. The most 
important examples of English monumental statuary in the 
thirteenth century are found on the facade of Wells (1220- 
c. 1250) (Fig. 143) ; the Apostles and angels at the top, how- 
ever, must be dated at least as late as the fourteenth century. 
The frequent elongation of the forms may indicate a relation 
to the antecedent school of the west portal of Chartres; but 
certain critics perceive in the carvings of Wells a greater 
tenderness and intimacy than in French Gothic, qualities that 
perhaps may be better understood as a softness of outline con- 
sistent with the vaporous atmosphere of the island. The 
drapery is rippled in a fashion which was usual in the monu- 


268 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


mental statues of England during the century and which was 
more beautifully realized on the lateral portals of Chartres 
and at Strassburg. The facade of Wells also contains the 
most remarkable English series of smaller reliefs for ex- 
terior decoration. Among the few other extant large statues 
of the thirteenth century 
should be mentioned the 
figures about the Judgment 
Porch at Lincoln. The re- 
lief that gives the Judgment 
Porch its name, still retain- 
ing much of the Roman- 
esque pictorial manner, is 
the only significant in- 
stance, in Gothic England, 
of a tympanum the whole 
face of which is sculptured 
with a single subject. The 
arch-mouldings, however, 
are occasionally carved 
with rows of little figures, 
either in the continental 
setting of small niches or, 
rig. 143—starues on NortH tower {ter the old English Ro- 
BUTTRESSES, CATHEDRAL, WELLS manesque fashion, in the 
interstices of foliage. Both 

systems appear on the lovely archivolts of the Judgment 
Porch. Apart from Wells, the most notable work in relief 
is found on the spandrels of interior arches in southern 
and western England. Best known are the sadly “restored”’ 
specimens from the Old Testament in the chapter-house of 
Salisbury. In distinction from narrative reliefs, a popular 
English theme for the spandrel, as, indeed, for all English 
sculpture, was the angel, whose outspread wings were pe- 
culiarly fitted to fill the given space. The examples include 
the supreme achievements of English Gothic carving, the four 
angels above the windows of the trifort1um level at the two 
transept ends of Westminster (Fig. 144). The thirty angels 
of the triforium arches in the “Angel Choir” at Lincoln are 


THE MIDDLE AGES 269 


still lovely, though less noble and already somewhat tainted 
with the coquetry that was to become general in the four- 
teenth century. 

Tombs of the thirteenth century. In England the tombs 
frequently took the place of sections of the screen between the 


FIG. 144—ANGEL, SOUTH TRANSEPT, WESTMINSTER ABBEY 


sanctuary and the ambulatory; and instead of the niche in a 
wall, the superstructure thus became an elaborately wrought 
canopy of open-work. The most interesting sepulchral pecu- 
liarity was the greater agitation of the knights. Abovtit the 
middle of the century, they began to be represented with 
their legs crossed. The posture may have originally sym- 


270 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


bolized the crusader, but later it became merely a stereotyped 
attitude without any such significance. Possibly, instead, 
the intent had been to give the impression of movement ac- 
cording to the old precedent of the Romanesque school of 
Languedoc or to embody a position that the Middle Ages 
connected with the aristocrat. Familiar instances may be 
seen in the Temple Church, London. Often, as in a fine ex- 
ample in the Mayor’s Chapel, Bristol, the activity was 
extended to the gesture of drawing the sword. The Henry III 
and Queen Eleanor (wife of Edward I) in the Confessor’s 
Chapel, Westminster, begin auspiciously a momentous series 
of royal mortuary bronzes. 

The fourteenth century. English sculpture of the four- 
teenth century was apparently based, with some sporadic 
exceptions, upon the typical style of the period in France; 
but within this general plastic manner there was a good 
deal of local experimentation and variation until about 1350, 
when production began to be reduced to that single norm 
which, with constant deterioration, was maintained through- 
out England until the end of the Gothic period. It is possible 
to trace the change on the facade of Exeter, which alone, 
from the fourteenth century, has preserved its monumental 
decoration. The Warriors and Kings that were carved in 
the lowest row about. 1345 exhibit a praiseworthy spirit of 
initiative in the study of movement and dramatic expression; 
the Apostles and Prophets in the upper tiers of about 1380 
possess, to be sure, more intrinsic beauty, but they are only 
good, honest pieces of craftsmanship, stolid in proportions and 
attitudes, and perhaps dependent upon Franco-Flemish art. 
Among the best examples of the characteristically animated 
small reliefs of this century are the many episodes from the 
life and miracles of the Virgin on the spandrels of the stone 
seats for the clergy in the Lady Chapel at Ely. In wood- 
carving, also, the upper row of choir-stalls at Ely may be 
classed with the finest specimens that England produced. In 
the sculpturing of such objects the English have nothing to 
fear from a comparison with the greatest continental masters. 
Of many other examples of the fourteenth century, those at 


THE MIDDLE AGES 271 


Chester and Gloucester may be singled out for special 
mention. 

Tombs of the fourteenth century. At the first of the cen- 
tury, certain knights, such as two examples from a series at 
Aldworth (Fig. 145), show how the histrionic attitude was 


FIG. 145—KNIGHT ON A TOMB, CHURCH AT ALDWORTH NEAR OXFORD. 
(FROM “MEDIEVAL FIGURE-SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND” BY PRIOR AND GARDNER) 


now sometimes increased to an almost painful agitation. On 
the other hand, as in the lovely effigy of Aymer de Valence at 
Westminster, the return to tranquillity was more usual. The 
hands were soon united in prayer above the chest, and by 
1350 even the crossing of the legs was abandoned. If the 


FIG. 146—SEPULCHRAL EFFIGY OF EDWARD III. WESTMINSTER ABBEY. 
(FROM ‘MEDIEVAL FIGURE-SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND” BY PRIOR AND GARDNER) 


figures around the bases of tombs were conceived as weepers, 
at least they did not assume the conventional costume of 
mourners until the fifteenth century. In the matter of por- 
traiture the English were conservative; they came nearest 
to realizing the individual on the royal sepulchres, as in the 
bronze effigy of Edward III at Westminster (Fig 146). 


272 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


The late Gothic. The fifteenth century gave birth to no 
such important movements in England as in the other coun- 
tries of Europe, but continued with less freedom and correct- 
ness the monotonous style that had been evolved throughout 
the island after 13850. A certain amount of Flemish realism 
was imported, but it was devitalized into a fixed and common- 
place dryness. The best monumental statuary of the period, 
now and then enlivened by 
a breath of sincerer realism, 
is found upon such interior 
structures as the reredos 
and the chantry, which now 
became frequent and pre- 
tentious objects in English 
churches. The assembly of 
saints in the chapel or 
chantry of Henry VII at 
Westminster (1510-1512), 
despite the recurrent stubby 
proportions and other de- 
fects, are rather remarkable 
for variation of type and 
posture. The kinship to 
Flemish sculpture is mani- 
fest, and a slight acquaint- 
ance with the Renaissance 
has helped the craftsmen to 
some realization of ideal 
FIG. 147—sT. SEBASTIAN AND TWO beauty and, sporadically, as 
EXECUTIONERS, CHAPEL OF HENRY VII, ° : . 
WESTMINSTER ABBEY. (FROM “MeEpIE- 10 the Sts. George, Martin, 
VAL FIGURE-SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND” and Sebastian, to an em- 
BY PRIOR AND GARDNER) bryonic attainment of Ital- 

ian elegance (Fig. 147). 
Smaller architectural carving of figures largely disappeared, 
except in the case of heraldic symbols, the gargoyles, and the 
angels on the cornices, all of which now obtained a great 
vogue. A famous instance of the last form of decoration 
occurs in St. George’s Chapel, Windsor. The stalls con- 
tinued to be carved without much change in style, except 


THE MIDDLE AGES 273 


for some Flemish influence. Spirited examples may be seen 
at Norwich, Ripon, and in Henry VII’s Chapel. 

The retables. The most truly English articles of ecclesias- 
tical furniture were the alabaster retables. Although the 
style of the reliefs was doubtless influenced by Flemish re- 
tables and by English painting, the attempt at the pictorial 
was not carried so far as in Flanders, the story was not told 
with such a charming spirit of genre, and the mannered exe- 


FIG. 148—PANELS FROM AN ENGLISH RETABLE. METROPOLITAN MUSEUM, 
NEW YORK. (COURTESY OF THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM) 


cution was lamentably inferior. The forms are extrava- 
gantly thin and stiff, the anatomy puerile, the poses affected 
and perfunctory; the craftsmen succeed in reproducing ac- 
tuality only in the studied contemporary costumes. The 
cheapness of these objets de piété, however, ensured them so 
enthusiastic a market abroad, particularly in near-lying Nor- 
mandy, that complete examples may now be seen only on the 
continent. The Metropolitan Museum possesses three panels, 
parts of a retable of the Passion and probably to be dated 
early in the fifteenth century (Fig. 148). 


274 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


B. SPAIN 


General characteristics of the earlier Gothic period. The 
French influence continued to dominate Spanish sculpture 
during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The indig- 
enous impress, however, is to be found, now here and now 
there, in Moorish elements, in the taste for luxuriant decora- 
tion, in a kind of provincialism, in the personal types, in a 


FIG. 149—pORTICO DE LA GLORIA, CATHEDRAL, SANTIAGO DE COMPOSTELA. 
(PHOTO. LACOSTE) 


frequent heaviness of physique, in a tendency to petrify the 
sacred figures into the solemn rigidity of idols, or, on the 
other hand, in a more familiar naturalism. 

The transition. A transition from Romanesque to Gothic 
is embodied in the principal portal and the narthex of San- 
tiago de Compostela, the Portico de la Gloria, which, as one 
of the noblest assemblages of medieval sculpture (Fig. 149), 
richly deserves its title. It needs only a glance to realize 
the derivation from the school of Chartres, but there is 


THE MIDDLE AGES 275 


evidence also of an acquaintance with southern French and 
especially Burgundian Romanesque. The vigorously differ- 
entiated and expressive heads form one of the most striking 
proofs of the relationship to the transitional school of north- 
ern France. The statues, however, are less elongated than at 
Chartres itself, the art is more naturalistic and less schema- 
tized, the poses and draperies are freer and more cognizant of 
grace, and the twenty-four Elders on the main archivolt re- 
veal a tenser dramatic sense. The author of the portal, a 
Frenchman or Gallicized Spaniard, has proudly signed his 
name on the under side of the main lintel, together with the 
date of the installation of 
the sculpture — Master 
Matthew, 1188. The same 
transitional Spanish style is 
superbly represented also 
by the pairs of Apostles in 
the Camara Santa of the 
cathedral of Oviedo and, 
with stronger Buregundian 
influences, by the west por- 
tal and Annunciation of the 
lateral portal of S. Vicente, 
Avila. 

The thirteenth century. 
Whole sections of Spain 
during the thirteenth cen- 
tury still remained imper- 
vious to the new style 
across the Pyrenees; the 
most important centres of  jyq, 150—srarvEs oF PRINCES, CLOIS- 
the Gallic fashion were the TER OF CATHEDRAL, BURGOS 
cathedrals of Burgos and 
Leon on the pilgrimage routes from France. At Burgos 
the chief sculptural monuments belonging to this period 
are the transept portals of about the middle of the cen- 
tury, the portal of the second half of the century leading 
from the transept into the cloister, and a number of fine 
statues in the cloister itself, most interesting among which are 


276 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


a king and queen with five princes, probably representing 
Alfonso the Wise, Violante of Aragon, and their five sons 
(Fig. 150), and incorporating a tendency to introduce contem- 
poraries into sacred art as in Germany, though without the 
German desire for realistic portraiture. The carvings at Leon 
include the main and transept portals and seem to have been 
executed chiefly at the end of the century, perhaps partly 
under the influence of the atelier of Bourges. The congrega- 
tion of the redeemed in the lowest zone of the central tym- 
panum of the facade and the Virgin on the pillar below, 
Nuestra Senora la Blanca, are treated with a charming natu- 
ralism that bespeaks the Spanish environment. 

Tombs of the thirteenth century. The ordinary Spanish 
type of the thirteenth century was a niche, usually pointed, 
in the wall of the church or cloister; tympanum, base, and 
arch were decorated with reliefs. The monument of Bishop 
Martin in the cathedral of Leon introduces on the sarcopha- 
gus one of the prelate’s works of mercy, the distribution of 
food to the poor and sick, treated already with something of 
Ribera’s delight in squalid naturalism. The sepulchre of the 
cantor Aparicio in the old cathedral of Salamanca may serve, 
with its frieze of stalactite vaults, to illustrate a subdivision 
of Spanish tombs in which Moorish decoration was already 
fused with the Gothic to form a primitive stage of the archi- 
tectural style called the mudéjar. 

The fourteenth century. During this period, the French 
manner, in the form that it then assumed, won its way into 
all the other important parts of Spain, leaving uninvaded 
only the sections that were still Moorish or had lately been 
so and such remote provinces as Estremadura. For monu- 
mental sculpture the two great fields were now Navarre and 
the eastern kingdom of Catalonia and Aragon, which had 
been sterile for the last hundred years. The cloister of the 
cathedral at Pampeluna, the capital of Navarre, contains 
much thoroughly Gallic work, the finest example of which 
is the door called La Preciosa, leading to the old chapter- 
house. Catalonia reveals a more original adaptation of 
the French models, but the originality by no means implies 


THE MIDDLE AGES 277 


superiority. A palpable difference exists between the 
Gallicized Virgin and eight Apostles on the main door of 
the cathedral of Tarragona from the end of the thirteenth 
century and the rather Spanish Apostles and Prophets 
around the adjacent buttresses, which, executed towards the 
end of the fourteenth century, are heavier, less flexible, 
and more colossal. To keep company with the Italian 
influence upon Catalonian architecture and painting, there 
was naturally some Italianate sculpture. The most marked 
example is the reliquary of St: Eulalia in the crypt 
of the cathedral of Barcelona, a rude counterpart of such 
shrines as that of St. Peter Martyr at Milan. Of the three 
great western cathedrals, Burgos, Leon, and Toledo, the last 
had waited until now to receive its plastic adornment. But 
the age of monumentality was passing, and the tympanum 
of the first portal to be decorated, the Puerta del Reloj, 
received four zones of many small episodical reliefs. Accord- 
ing to the peculiar arrangement of Spanish churches, the 
screen that marked 
off the large enclo- 
sure or coro for the 
clergy in the nave 
became a prominent 
article of furniture, 
and is already em- 
bellished at Toledo 
with a long series of 
Biblical reliefs in the 
homely manner of 
the period. 

Tombs of the four- 
teenth century. It is 
in general only the 
more lavish Gothic 
ornamentation that FIG. 151—rToMBS, S. ESTEBAN, CUBLLAR 
differentiates the 
tombs from those of the preceding century. In the mausoleum 
of the Archbishop Lope Fernandez de Luna in the Seo of 
Saragossa, the niche is even amplified into a kind of mor- 


278 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


tuary chapel. Mohammedan fancy continued to give a 
national tone to Spanish art in such sepulchres as those of 
two knights in the church of S. Esteban at Cuéllar near 
Segovia: the bases, arches, and their frames are embellished 
with a profusion of Gothic and Moorish motifs in flat 
oriental relief (Fig. 151). 

The fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. The French 
influences were now supplanted by Flemish and eventually 
also German models. Oc- 
casionally it was the Bur- 
gundian modification of the 
Flemish style that was cul- 
tivated. The national gen- 
ius declared itself more 
emphatically, not so much 
in single figures as in the 
ways in which they were 
grouped together and in the 
prodigality with which they 
were employed as decora- 
tion. In the west the great 
commissions were often as- 
signed to foreign artists. 
Of architectural sculpture 
in this section of Spain may 
be mentioned the German 
Apostles on the Puerta de 
los Leones of the cathedral 
FIG. 152.—PERE JOHAN DE VALLFOGONA. of Toledo, dating from the 
OF RETABLE OF caTHEDRAL, Tartagowa T™Hiddle of the fifteenth cen- 

tury, and the decoration of 
the two lateral doors in the facade of the cathedral of Seville, 
ascribed by some connoisseurs to Lorenzo Mercadante, who, 
though of Breton origin, had come under Burgundian influ- 
ence, and by others to Pedro Millan, a charming master, 
perhaps also a foreigner, likewise trained in Burgundian tra- 
ditions, and active in Seville at the beginning of the sixteenth. 
century. The style of Catalonia and Aragon continued to 
be more original, and the work was usually executed by 


a 


THE MIDDLE AGES 279 


native artists, who, though schooled in the Flemish manner, 
yet impressed local qualities upon their work. Among the 
best examples, dating from the first half or middle of the 
fifteenth century, are the archangel over the door in the old 
facade of the Casa Consistorial at Barcelona, and a frieze 
of realistic heads, with a medallion of St. George, over the 
entrance to the Casa de la Diputacion. 

The retables and choir-stalls. The Spanish retables were 
huge structures, larger than the examples produced in the 
rest of Europe. Not transportable but fixed immovably in 
their places, they were higher than they were broad and 
lacked folding wings. The material in the east was alabaster. 
The finest specimens were done by Pere Johan de Vallfogona 
and his workshop: one for the cathedral of Tarragona, begun 
in 1426 (Fig. 152); another for the Seo at Saragossa, only 
the predella of which was executed by Pere Johan, in 1445, 
leaving the body of the huge structure to be carried out in 
a German style by the Swabian Master Hans of Gmiind 
between 1470 and 1480; and another predella of the same 
period as that of the Seo for the archbishop’s chapel at Sara- 
gossa, now in the Metropolitan Museum, New York. In 
the west, during the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella, the 
retables became colossal screens of sculptured wood, sumptu- 
ously colored and overladen with a truly pagan magnificence. 
The high altars of Seville and Toledo are surmounted by the 
two most remarkable examples. The choir-stalls, such as 
those of the cathedral of Leon or the lower range at Toledo 
with scenes from the siege of Granada, now received a care 
and an elaboration that make them equal, if not superior, to 
any others in Europe. 

The late Gothic tombs. In Catalonia, as on the tomb of 
the Bishop Bernard de Pau in the cathedral of Gerona, in 
Navarre, and even in other parts of Spain, as notably at 
Sigiienza and Cuenca, the mortuary repertoire sometimes took 
the eccentric form of a vertical arrangement in bands. In 
addition to the sepulchral niche, there appeared for the first 
time in Spain the completely detached base upholding the 
effigy. An early example is the fine monument of Charles the 
Noble of Navarre, now in a hall adjoining the cathedral of 


280 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Pampeluna, executed in 1416 by a Fleming, Janin Lomme of 
Tournai, with an approximation to the Burgundian tomb 
of Philip the Bold. 

The “détente.” At the end of the fifteenth century Gil de 
Siloé, who was perhaps himself a native of northern Europe 


FIG. 153—TOMB OF DON MARTIN VASQUEZ DE ARCE. CATHEDRAL, SIGUENZA. 
(COURTESY OF HISPANIC SOCIETY, NEW YORK) 


and in any case had been formed by the Teutonic masters 
working at Burgos, retained their influence in his complicated 
draperies, but he sought, especially in his countenances, an 
ideal beauty that constituted a partial détente of realism. 
His most ambitious achievements, in which Spanish fondness 


THE MIDDLE AGES 281 


for the luxuriant runs riot, are found in the sanctuary of the 
Carthusian church of Miraflores near Burgos: the unusually 
opulent retable (in collaboration with Diego de la Cruz); 
in front of the altar the joint tomb of Isabella’s royal parents; 
and against one wall the monument of her kneeling brother, 
the Infante Alfonso. Gil de Siloé always rose to the occasion 
of carving the sumptuous stuffs and jewelled embossings of 
the draperies in which he delighted. The most superb ex- 
ample is perhaps to be seen in the tomb of Isabella’s favorite 
page, Juan de Padilla, now in the Museum of Burgos. A 
similar tendency to a détente may be discerned in a sculptural 
school which centred at Sigiienza at the end of the cen- 
tury and cultivated in its figures a quiet, vague, and almost 
mystic melancholy. The masterpiece of the school is the 
tomb of the young Knight of Santiago, Don Martin Vasquez 
de Arce, erected about 1490 in the cathedral of Sigiienza 
(Fig. 153). 


G. ITALY 


Introduction. By a rather arbitrary but convenient 
nomenclature, the chronological limits of the Gothic period 
in Italian sculpture are usually defined as including the 
plastic production that began with Nicola d’Apulia about 
the middle of the thirteenth, and continued, largely in de- 
pendence upon him and his son, Giovanni Pisano, until the 
end of the fourteenth century. French Gothic sculpture and, 
in northern Italy, German sculpture certainly played their 
parts in the formation of the Italian style; but, because of 
the development of more distinct personality in Italian 
masters, greater originality was impressed upon the foreign 
borrowings than in other countries. 

Nicola @Apulia. The principal significance of Nicola 
d’Apulia (c. 12057-1278?) is that, even to a greater extent 
than is to be seen in the archaizing statues at Reims, he 
superimposed an imitation of the antique upon the Gothic 
forms. Whether or not he was actually born in Apulia, he 
certainly obtained his training amidst the revival of classi- 
cism in the south. The name, Nicola Pisano, by which until 


282 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


recently he has been known, was derived from his residence 
and probable citizenship in Pisa. The polygonal form of his 
pulpits he acquired from the artistic tradition of Apulia, 
but he took from earlier Tuscan pulpits the complete in- 
vestiture of the panels with sacred narrative. His first great 
monument, the hexagonal pulpit of the Pisan Baptistery, he 


FIG. 154—NICOLA D’APULIA. PULPIT. BAPTISTERY, PISA. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


completed in 1260 (Fig. 154). The derivation from Hellen- 
istic sarcophagi is evident in the heroic Roman types and in 
the crowding of the reliefs; he even copied some of his figures 
from antiques that have now been relegated to the Campo 
Santo. Nicola, however, was more than a mere imitator. 
He possessed a fine sense of composition, and he imported 
into his rendering of the sacred drama a keen observation 
of actual life. He was able to give freer rein to his origi- 


THE MIDDLE AGES 283 


nality in the second of his two principal works, the pulpit 
of the Sienese cathedral, begun with the aid of several pupils 
in 1265 or 1266. An elaboration of the earlier monument, 
it is an octagon, substituting statuettes for the small grouped 
columns that had separated the reliefs. The Olympic 
majesty of the Pisan pulpit is partly sacrificed to the crowd- 
ing of the panels with smaller figures and to a greater 


FIG. I55—NICOLA D’APULIA. SECTION OF PULPIT. CATHEDRAL, SIENA. 
(PHOTO. ALINARI) 


realism (Fig. 155). In the statuettes of the corners, as 
especially in the Virgin and Child, Nicola gave his highest 
expression to the ideal beauty cultivated by the thirteenth 
century, but it was now an idealism based as much upon 
a study of nature as upon classical art. 

Giovanni Pisano. Like his father, Giovanni Pisano (c. 
1250-after 1317) expressed himself most characteristically in 
two pulpits. The first, executed 1298-1301 for the church 
of 8. Andrea at Pistoia, is like Nicola’s Pisan pulpit in con- 


284 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


struction, except that it employs statuettes for the dividing 
angles above and substitutes a range of Sibyls (Fig. 156) be- 
tween the arches below. By accentuating the realism and 
agitation of the Christian subjects, he has moved further 
away from an imitation of the antique, so that his forms, 
even more than the late works of Nicola, resemble the Gothic 
sculpture of the rest of Europe. Being slighter and more 
human, they crowd the 
spaces less. But Giovanni 
had an individual trait, 
emotionalism, which, in his 
productions, impressed a 
highly personal character 
upon the general Gothic 
foundation. This emotion- 
alism declared itself at 
times in the tender and 
pathetic attitude towards 
the religious themes bred 
by Franciscanism; or it 
took the shape of a nervous 
and in places an almost 
tragic intensity, revealed in 
the expression of the coun- 
tenance, in distortion of the 
FIG. 156—GIOVANNI PISANO. SIBYL ON body, and in violence of 
PULPIT. S. ANDREA, PISTOIA. (PHOTO. C : 
WRRSLENG single and grouped action. 
The most elaborate pulpit 
in the series was built by Giovanni Pisano between 1302 
and 1310 for the cathedral of Pisa. It was injured by fire 
at the end of the sixteenth century, but its principal parts 
are preserved in the cathedral and the Museum and in the 
Kaiser Friedrich Museum at Berlin. The pitch of emo- 
tionalism has now been raised to the feverish, and the move- 
ment has become wild. The sculptor defiantly indulges in 
incorrect proportions, in order to divert the observer’s at- 
tention from accurate representation to the impression of 
passion. The torsos, especially, are often too long for the 
legs, and the forms are marked by a neurotic, pathological 


THE MIDDLE AGES 285 


emaciation. His separate devotional statues of the Madonna 
and Child exemplify a serener phase of his activity; but his 
tragic outlook on life led him to choose as a model the sor- 
rowing rather than the smiling Virgin of the French four- 
teenth century. The loveliest example in the series was 
sent about 1305 to the Arena Chapel at Padua. 

Arnolfo of Florence. Whether the sculptor Arnolfo of 
Florence, a pupil of Nicola d’Apulia, was identical with the 


FIG. 157—ARNOLFO OF FLORENCE. BALDACCHINO, S. PAOLO FUORI LE MURA, 
ROME 


celebrated architect Arnolfo di Cambio, is an open question; 
in any case the sculptor established the vogue of two 
artistic types in Italy, the Gothic ciborium or baldacchino 
and the Gothic tomb. Of the baldacchino, he executed two 
examples at Rome, in 8. Paolo fuori le Mura (1285) (Fig. 
157) and in S. Cecilia in Trastevere (1293). Although he 
was a less correct and skilful modeller than Nicola d’Apulia, 
he followed him in superimposing upon the Gothic archi- 
tecture figures suggested by the antique; but his forms are 


286 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


stubbier and more naturalistic than those of his master. With 
the sepulchre of the Cardinal de Braye (d. 1282) in S. 
Domenico, Orvieto, Arnolfo began the tradition of the more 
elaborate Italian medieval tomb or at least gave the stamp 
of his authority to it. The recumbent figure is set in a 
kind of mortuary recess, the curtains of which are drawn 
aside by two deacons; and above at the left the prelate ap- 
pears again, kneeling before the enthroned Virgin, to whom 
he is presented on his own side by St. Paul and on the other 


FIG. 158S—ANDREA PISANO. PANELS FROM BRONZE DOORS OF BAPTISTERY, 
FLORENCE, REPRESENTING THE NAMING OF ST. JOHN BAPTIST AND THE 
YOUNG ST. JOHN GOING FORTH INTO THE DESERT. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


by St. Dominic. The whole structure was originally covered 
by a Gothic canopy, now destroyed. The two effigies of the 
Cardinal embody the attempt at sepulchral portraiture that 
became general in Italy during the period. 

The Pisan style at Florence. One of the most celebrated 
exponents of the Pisan style at Florence was Andrea di 
Ugolino, who was born, however, at Pontedera in the terri- 
tory of Pisa and was called Andrea Pisano (c. 1270?-1348). 
He was certainly well advanced in years when in 1330 he 
began the most important commission of his life, the first 


THE MIDDLE AGES 287 


bronze doors of the Baptistery at Florence, consisting of 
twenty-eight rectangular panels, in which are inscribed 
Gothic frames of the common shape paralleled on the portals 
of Rouen and Lyons (Fig. 158). In the upper twenty of 
these frames is related the story of St. John Baptist, the 
patron of Florence, in the lower eight are allegorical Virtues. 
The reliefs are the work of a man whose nature was diametri- 
cally opposed to that of Giovanni Pisano. The distinctive 
notes are simplicity, repose, grace, and gentleness. In his 
simplicity of composition, Andrea Pisano was influenced by 
Giotto. For instance, he actually accommodated to the 
smaller scope of his panels sections of the painter’s monu- 
mental frescoes in the Peruzzi chapel of 8. Croce. It was 
perhaps the study of painting that led him to employ a cer- 
tain amount of landscape setting, although he wisely did not 
attempt the pictorial perspective which later was to violate 
the boundaries of sculpture. His admiration for Giotto ren- 
dered it fitting that he should undertake the sculptural adorn- 
ment of the campanile, the building of which that versatile 
artist at least supervised in its beginnings. Of the two zones 
of reliefs, the lower, including twenty-six panels, represents 
the Creation, the institution of labor by Adam and his de- 
scendants, and its different manifestations in the manual, 
representative, and intellectual arts. The upper zone, with 
twenty-eight panels, comprises the allegorical figures of the 
seven Liberal Arts (in contrast to their actual exercise be- 
low), followed by the seven Virtues, the seven Planets, and 
the seven Sacraments. Giotto seems to have conceived the 
whole iconographical scheme, but it is impossible to determine 
whether he himself did some little carving or at least made 
designs for the reliefs. With the exception of the five panels 
sculptured by Luca della Robbia in the Renaissance, the 
lower zone wholly or in very large part is apparently the 
actual handiwork of Andrea Pisano, who, in certain reliefs 
that exhibit an energy unusual for him, such as the represen- 
tation of Agriculture, may have used models left by Giotto. 
The upper but less successful zone was carved by later Flor- 
entine sculptors of the Middle Ages. Andrea Orcagna (d. c. 
1376), one of Giotto’s most original followers in painting, nat- 


288 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


urally revealed in his sculpture a more vital Giottesque influ- 
ence than Andrea Pisano. His great monument in this phase 
of art is the opulent canopy over the miraculous Madonna 
of the church of Or San Michele, Florence, completed in 1359 
after the precedent set by Arnolfo at Rome. He retained 
both the sturdy strength of Giotto’s forms and his wonderful 
spirit of religious gravity; but more than his master he oc- 
casionally cultivated Gothic 
grace, especially in the 
draperies. 

The Pisan style at Siena 
and Naples. The hedonistic 
and rather languid attitude 
towards life at Siena and 
the admiration for the man- 
nered French Gothic models 
of the fourteenth century 
bred in her artists a predi- 
lection for sinuous elegance 
and sweet sentiment. The 
best known names are Tino 
di Camaino and Lorenzo 
Maitani. The former (d. 
1337) owes his fame to the. 
development that he gave 
FIG. 159—TINO DI CAMAINO. TOMB OF to the Ttalian typeof 
MARY OF HUNGARY. §. MARIA DoNNA Gothic sepulchre. The 
REGINA, NAPLES. (PHOTO. ALINARI) most . complete examples 

were done for the cul- 
tured Angevin court at Naples. Tino added to the prece- 
dent set by Arnolfo: the Virtues as caryatides; the decora- 
tion of the sarcophagus with the effigy of the deceased as 
living, surrounded by members of the royal family or of 
the court; and clerics performing the funeral rites within 
the mortuary chamber. Typical is the first monument 
that he constructed (in 13825), the tomb of Mary of Hungary, 
in the church of S. Maria Donna Regina (Fig. 159). 
Lorenzo Maitani (c. 1275-1330) in all probability planned 
the facade of the cathedral of Orvieto and, through French 


THE MIDDLE AGES 289 


suggestion, devised the iconographic scheme for the plastic 
decoration of the four broad pilasters at the bottom. The 
general unity of style would imply that he superintended the 
carving and that after his death the Sienese and Florentines 
who succeeded him used his models. Some would see his 
own chisel especially in the first scenes from Genesis, which 
represent the highest achievement on the facade (Fig. 160). 
In any case, the pilasters as a whole must be reckoned among 


FIG. 160—MAITANI? RELIEFS OF THE CREATION. FACADE OF CATHEDRAL, 
ORVIETO. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


the masterpieces of Gothic sculpture. The graceful charm 
of Siena is ennobled, the nude is treated with enthusiasm 
and unexpected knowledge, and an Italian feeling for the 
body itself rather than the drapery as a plastic vehicle is 
evident in the effort to outline the forms beneath garments 
that are narrower and more clinging than was usual in the 
Pisan tradition. The embryonic but well defined pictorial 
perspective serves as a preparation for the accomplishment 
of Ghiberti. | 
The Pisan style in Lombardy. The purveyor of the Pisa 


290 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


mode in Lombardy and the adjacent districts was Giovanni di 
Balduccio of Pisa. His great monument for St. Peter Martyr 
in 8. Eustorgio, Milan (1339), was suggested by the shrine 
designed by Nicola d’Apulia for St. Dominic at Bologna. The 
best section is the row of Virtues as caryatides, which are 


FIG. 161—TOMBS OF THE SCALIGER FAMILY. S. MARIA ANTICA, VERONA 


already distinguished by the sensibility to feminine beauty 
that was always peculiarly characteristic of Milanese art. 
Other parts are inferior, especially the reliefs from the life 
of the saint, and probably were largely the production of 
pupils. The Pisan style was combined with the old Lombard- 
Romanesque tradition, or with French or German borrowings, 


THE MIDDLE AGES 291 


by the Campionesi, a group of sculptors coming from 
Campione on Lake Lugano and enjoying wide patronage in 
northern Italy even as late as the first part of the fifteenth 
century. The most important works connected with their 
names are the group of sepulchral monuments for the Scaliger 
family in the little cemetery adjoining the church of S. Maria 
Antica at Verona (Fig. 161); but the collaboration of the 
Venetian exponents of the Pisan traits, the bottega of the 
Santi family, is now very generally admitted. 

The Pisan style at Venice. The Pisan influence mani- 
fested itself particularly in the richly sculptured tombs, 
which resemble those of Verona, except that they were usually 
placed on the interior instead of the exterior wall of the 
church, and the crowning Gothic arch was likely to be in 
the most luxuriant Venetian taste. Sometimes a reredos 
was substituted for the arch. The first great representatives 
of the Pisan style at Venice, in the middle and third quarter 
of the fourteenth century, were a family named Santi and 
their workshop, the leading master in which was Andriolo 
Santi (d. 1377). His attainments may be studied at Padua 
in the tombs of Jacopo and Ubertino da Carrara in the church 
of the Eremitani. Late in the Trecento a very definite Ger- 
man influence joined itself to the Pisan in the persons 
of the brothers Jacobello and Pier Paolo dalle Masegne. 
The forceful realism of their Teutonic types is best illus- 
trated by the Apostles on the iconostasis of St. Mark’s. . 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


Of fundamental importance, not only for France but for all 
medieval Europe and not only for iconography but for the art 
and culture of the Middle Ages in general, are the three great 
works of E. Male, all published at Paris, L’art religieux du xu? 
siécle en France, 1922, L’art religieux du «xii siecle en France, 
third edition, 1910, and L’art religieux de la fin du Moyen Age 
en France, 1908. 

In addition to the general books mentioned in the bibliography 
at the end of Chapter I, A. K. Porter’s erudite and brilliant 
works, Lombard Architecture, New Haven, 1917, and Romanesque 
Sculpture of the Pilgrimage Roads, Boston, 1923, though com- 


292 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


posed partly in defense of theories that do not seem to the present 

writer always tenable, yet constitute landmarks in the study of 
Romanesque sculpture. Professor Porter has also contributed 
to the subject many articles of the utmost significance; but his 
critics should likewise be read, such as P. Deschamps, in an article 
on Burgundian sculpture in the Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1922, 
II, pp. 61-80. A foundation-stone in the bibliography of French 
Romanesque and early Gothic is W. Voge’s Die Anfdnge des 
monumentalen Stiles im Mittelalter, Strassburg, 1894. Other 
useful books are A. Marignan’s Histoire de la sculpture en 
Languedoc du axii®-xie siécle, Paris, 1902, and G. Fleury’s Por- 
tails rmagés du aie siécle, Mamers, 1904. A handbook on the 
French Gothic sculpture of the thirteenth century, as delightful 
as it is scholarly, is L. Pillion’s Les sculpteurs francais du xwie 
siecle, Paris, 1911-1912. The authoritative monograph on the 
Burgundian school is A. Kleinclausz’s Claus Sluter et la sculp- 
ture bourguignonne au xv° siécle, Paris; on the détente, P. Vitry’s 
Michel Colombe, Paris, 1901; on the school of Champagne, R. 
Koechlin’s and J. J. Marquet de Vasselot’s La sculpture a Troyes 
et dans la Champagne méridionale, Paris, 1900. An old, discursive 
work on early Flemish art is M. le Chanoine De Haisnes’s 
Histoire de Vart dans les Flandres, Artois, et le Hainaut avant 
le xv? siecle, Lille, 1886. For the problem of the origin of 
Flemish realism, important articles are those of R. Koechlin, 
La sculpture belge et les influences francaises au xiii? et sxive 
siécles, Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1903, II, pp. 5-19, 333-348, 391- 
407. The medizval school of Antwerp is the subject of a special 
monograph, J. de Bosschére, La sculpture anversoise aux xv® et 
xv siécles, Brussels, 1909. 

A thorough-going treatment of German Romanesque and early 
Gothic, including the most recent information, may be found in 
G. Dehio’s Geschichte der deutschen Kunst, vol. I, Berlin, 1919; 
E. Liithgen’s Romanische Plastik in Deutschland, Bonn, 19238, 
though somewhat too subtly concerned with esthetic theory, is 
indispensable to the student of primitive German sculpture. The 
classical work on the Gothic sculpture of Germany in the thirteenth 
century is M. Hasak’s Geschichte der deutschen Bildhauerkunst 
im «ut. Jahrhundert, Berlin, 1899. M. Sauerlandt, in Deutsche 
Plastik des Mittelalters, Leipzig, 1911, provides a well chosen col- 
lection of excellent reproductions of medizval German sculpture 
in general. The achievements of north-German sculptors in the 
late Gothic period are set forth in S. Beissel’s Die Kalkarer 


THE MIDDLE AGES 293 


Bildhauer, Zeitschrift fiir christliche Kunst, 1903, pp. 354-370, 
and in E. Liithgen’s Die niederrheinische Plastik, Strassburg, 
1917, a work that contains illuminating discussions of many other 
aspects of medieval art. A fundamental book for the study of 
the south-German retable is M. Schiitte’s Der schwabische 
Schnitzaltar, Strassburg, 1907. For Stoss, the standard mono- 
graphs are M. Lossnitzer, Veit Stoss, Leipzig, 1912, and B. Daun’s 
Veit Stoss und seine Schule, Leipzig 1916; for Krafft, B. Daun, 
Adam Krafft und die Kiinstler seiner Zeit, Berlin, 1897, and 
D. Stern, Der Niirnberger Bildhauer, Adam Kraft, Strassburg, 
1916; for Riemenschneider, Edward Tonnies, Leben und Werke 
des Wiurzburger Bildschnitzers Tilmann Riemenschneider, 
Strassburg, 1900. The late Gothic sculpture of Swabia may be 
further investigated in J. Baum, Die Ulmer Plastik um 1500, 
Stuttgart, 1911, and in E. Grill, Der Ulmer Bildschnitzer Jorg 
Syrlin d. a. und seine Schule, Strassburg, 1910. A. R. Maier’s 
Niclaus Gerhaert von Leiden, Strassburg, 1910, has now been 
partially superseded by W. Voge, Uber Nicolaus Gerhaert, Zeit- 
schrift fiir bildende Kunst, N. F. XXIV (1912-19138), pp. 97-108, 
by F. Back, Ein wiedergefundenes Werk des Nicolaus Gerhaert, 
Minchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst, IX (1914-1915), pp. 
297-302, and by T. Demmler, Bettrage zur Kenntnis des Bild- 
hauers Nicolaus Gerhaert, Jahrbuch der preussischen Kunst- 
sammlungen, XLII (1921), pp. 20-33. H. Bergner’s Handbuch 
der kirchlichen Kunstaltertiimer in Deutschland, Leipzig, 1905, 
is a convenient book of reference for German medieval art, 
especially in the case of iconography. 

The great work on English sculpture of the Middle Ages is 
E. S. Prior and A. Gardner’s Medieval Figure-Sculpture in 
England, Cambridge, England, 1912. Francis Bond’s London 
publications, Screens and Galleries in English Churches, 1908, 
and Wood Carvings in English Churches, 1910, and F. H. Cross- 
ley’s English Church Monuments, London, 1921, are helpful com- 
pilations both for information and illustrations. In addition to 
E. Bertaux’s articles in Michel’s Histoire, which provide the best 
general discussion of Spanish medieval sculpture, the student 
may consult for the Romanesque E. Serrano Fatigati, Hscultura 
romanica en Espana, Madrid, 1900, and the exasperatingly dis- 
eursive book of G. G. King, The Way of Saint James, in three 
volumes, New York, 1920, in the labyrinth of which, however, 
important material is hidden. E. Serrano Fatigati’s Portadas 
artisticas de monumentos espanoles, Madrid, 1907, is useful both 


294 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


for the Romanesque and Gothic periods, especially for its illus- 

trations. The distinguished Spanish scholar, R. de Orueta, in 
La escultura funeraria en Espana (Provincias de Ciudad Real, 
Cuenca, Guadalajara), Madrid, 1919, has begun an exhaustive 
investigation of the mediwval sepulchral art of Spain, which it is 
to be hoped he will complete. A. L. Mayer promises to follow up 
his convenient little compendium, Mittelalterliche Plastik in 
Spanien, Munich, 1922, with a larger book on the subject. In 
addition to the general works already mentioned, one may turn 
to the following volumes for medieval Italy: the vast and epoch- 
making book by E. Bertaux, L’art dans [Italie méridionale, 
Paris, 1904; M. Wackernagel, Die Plastik des x1. und «uw. Jahr- 
hunderts in Apulien, Leipzig, 1911; A. Brach, Nicola und 
Giovanni Pisano und die Plastik des xiv. Jahrhunderts in 
Siena, Strassburg, 1904; and H. Graber, Bewttrage zw Nicola 
Pisano, Strassburg, 1911. 


CHAPTER XI 
THE RENAISSANCE 
I. INTRODUCTION 


The Renaissance began in Italy in the fifteenth century, 
or Quattrocento, reached its fruition in the sixteenth, or 
Cinquecento, and at that time, a hundred years after its in- 
ception, spread to the rest of Europe. The diversity between 
the Middle Ages and the Renaissance manifested itself in two 
principal channels—in humanism, the more eager and intelli- 
gent comprehension of antiquity, and in individualism, the 
greater emphasis upon personality, The medieval study of 
classical antiquity had been somewhat desultory, and the 
imitations of ancient art and literature had been limited and 
casual; now, a ferment of archeological enthusiasm was 
created, and the practice of resorting to the models of Greece 
and Rome became more general and was pursued in a spirit 
of more scientific accuracy. Of special interest was the addi- 
tion of mythological and classical themes to the repertoire of 
art, which had hitherto been so largely religious. By the six- 
teenth century humanism had acquired such a tyrannical 
power.as to enslave artists rather than stimulate them. The 
man of the Renaissance extricated himself from the society 
in which he lived and sought to realize his own individuality 
and to cultivate to the fullest its many possibilities. The 
artist, conscious of his high calling, began to take the place 
of the medieval craftsman, the member of a corporation, 
and iconography depended more on individual invention. The 
study of self led to an interest in other human beings and 
finally to an investigation of their environment, the natural 
world. The spirit of the age was revealed in art by the ef- 
fort after a more truthful representation of actuality; and 
this tendency grew and grew until in the sixteenth century 

295 


296 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


almost all primitive eccentricities were repudiated, and an 
exact, but, as we shall see, a superficial, faithfulness to nature 
was the great desideratum. In Italy of the fifteenth century, 
the struggle for a more accurate reproduction of nature fell 
into line with the ubiquitous contemporary European em- 
phasis upon realism. With this realistic consummation in 
view, many Italians devoted themselves, in the scientific 
temper of the day, to the solution of the technical problems 
of art, such as anatomy, perspective, and the rendering of 
movement. A growing appreciation for the esthetic signifi- 
cance of the nude was due, not only to the pattern of the 
ancients, but also to the prevalent enthusiasm for investi- 
gation, which would not rest until it had reached what in 
the sphere of art is closest to the essence of things, the un- 
draped human body. The attitude of inquiry and of rebellion 
from established formule had attained such proportions by 
the Cinquecento that it not only impaired Christian faith and 
the force of religion as an inspiration to art, but in northern 
Europe also helped to provoke the Reformation. Conditions 
within the Church itself were much ameliorated in the second 
half of the Cinquecento by the Counter-Reformation or 
Catholic Reaction, led by the recently founded order of 
Jesuits; but Jesuitism and the new Catholicism did not be- 


come effective as an esthetic stimulus until the period of the. 


baroque in the next century. Whereas in Italy the Renais- 
sance was a natural development, from the long established 
humanistic tendencies of the peninsula, in other lands it was, 
to some extent, a foreign excrescence and therefore not so 
suitable a medium for the expression of racial ideals. Except 
in England, however, the old artistic traditions of the several 
countries partially impressed themselves upon the Italian 
importations and gave to them, in each case, a certain 
national tone. ek 


II. IrauIAN SCULPTURE OF THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY 


A. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS 


Despite the fact that Italian sculpture of the Quattrocento 
is regularly described as belonging to the Renaissance, yet 


i 


THE RENAISSANCE 297 


in many essential respects it is analogous to the Gothic 
output of other European countries during this period. Its 
realism was common, international property in the fifteenth 
century ; but the phenomenon of individualism in Italy trans- 
formed even the figures of Holy Writ and of classical my- 
thology into more incisively characterized portraits. To a 
further degree also than in other regions, the intellectuality 
of the early Renaissance and its individualistic concern with 
the inner life and meaning of things influenced Italian artists 
to represent the underlying thoughts and spiritual experiences 
of their personages through the outward manifestations in 
the body and particularly the countenance. In the first-half 
of the century, the forms of Italian sculpture, as in Ghiberti 
and Jacopo della Quercia, often still remained largely Gothic; 
but even when, as particularly in the second half of the cen- 
tury, the forms became different from those of the rest of 
Europe, the spirit was the same. The tranquillizing effect of 
the antique may be called into service to explain the frequent 
moderation of realism and passion, although this phenomenon 
may also be viewed as the same kind of spontaneous reaction 
that is represented by the French détente. What difference 
existed between Italian and other European sculpture was 
chiefly created by this Italian devotion to the antique. It is 
true that classical models had been so vital to the medieval 
style of Nicola d’Apulia that the Renaissance might have 
begun a century and a half earlier, if his son had continued 
to set the example of a fervid archeology; but now the imi- 
tation of the art of the pagan past was no longer sporadic 
but a universal phenomenon. The artists of the Quattrocento, 
however, adapted suggestions from the antique to their own 
purposes, instéad of merely copying the antique like their 
successors of the Cinquecento. Details of modelling, poses, 
costume, and setting were often derived from classical proto- 
types, but the basic conception and execution remained origi- 
nal. The development of individualism instilled into art a 
fresh and unique spirit of enterprise and experimentation, 
sharply contrasted with the rather lifeless imitation of Pisan 
models in the later fourteenth century. The most vigorous, 
beautiful, and characteristic sculpture of the Quattrocento 


298 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


was ‘produced at Florence, which was then the centre of 
Italian civilization. 


B. SCULPTURE AT FLORENCE 
1. The First Half of the Quattrocento 


Donatello. His career. The father of all Renaissance art 
was Donatello (c. 1385-1466). His life may be divided into 
four periods: the first, which extended to 1432, the year of 
his journey to Rome with his partner, the architect and 
sculptor, Michelozzo Michelozzi; the second, covering the 
decade from 14383 to 1443 and confined chiefly to the sculp- 
tural adornment of architectural monuments; the third and 
the culmination of his career, including the next decade, 
when he was occupied at Padua in the creation of the great 
equestrian statue of the Venetian condottiere, Gattamelata, 
and the bronzes composing the high altar of the church of 
S. Antonio; and the fourth, his old age, from 1454 to 1466, 
when, following the usual course of evolution, he exaggerated 
the salutary qualities of his prime. 

His realism. Donatello’s outstanding characteristic was 
his realism. Its early phase is exemplified by a group of 
Prophets and Patriarchs for the cathedral and campanile 
of Florence, belonging to a large series of monumental 
statues that were executed at this time by Donatello and 
others for these edifices and for the exterior niches of Or 
San Michele. Breaking violently with the medieval tradi- 
tion, they are highly individualized portraits of withered 
old men, to the delineation of whom Donatello gladly turned 
because the wrinkles, the protruding bones, muscles, and 
veins gave him an opportunity to show that he was not afraid - 
of a realism as unsparing as in the strikingly similar Bur- 
gundian Prophets by Sluter. The illustration (Fig. 162) in- 
cludes the Jeremiah and the figure nicknamed the Zuccone or 
pumpkin-head by reason of his bald pate, probably repre- 
senting Job or Habakkuk, not, as the inscription states, 
David. Donatello abandoned the Pisan conventions of 
drapery, and purposely complicated the folds peculiarly in 


THE RENAISSANCE 299 


order to exhibit his new found skill in the extraordinary 
phases of actuality. Realism took with him partly the form 
of emaciation, by which also the structure of the body was 
laid bare. He found in it a kind of esoteric beauty, symbolic 
of the wiry energy, the unceasing activity, the purity, and the 


FIG. 162—DONATELLO. “LO ZUCCONE” AND JEREMIAH. CAMPANILE, 
FLORENCE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


asceticism that for him constituted the highest ideals of life. 
The increased influence of the antique through his journey to 
Rome in 1432 helped to temper the extravagance that had 
marked his more youthful realistic experimentation. The 
ultimate examples of a moderated realism are the Paduan 
masterpieces, the Crucifix and saints of the altar and the 


300 ' A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


head of the Gattamelata (Fig. 163). In his old age, he 
abandoned this moderation, and, as in the Magdalene of 
wood in the Florentine Baptistery, he appears to have felt, 
like certain modern men of letters, that: he could prove himself 
realistic only by turning to the sordid ugliness of life. 
Intellectuality and passion. The quality that sublimated 


FIG. 163—DONATELLO. GATTAMELATA. PADUA. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


his realism was the infusion of his figures with thought. Be-— 
yond mere accidents of subject and costume, what most es- 
sentially distinguishes his early work for Or San Michele, 
the St. George (now in the Bargello), from the statue of a 
classical hero is the impregnation of the head with a chival- 
rous nobility that makes him a typical representative of 
Christian knighthood. The Gattamelata is differentiated 


THE RENAISSANCE 301 


from the Roman equestrian statue that gave Donatello some 
suggestions, the Marcus Aurelius of the Capitoline, by the 
intellectual traits which speak through the lineaments of the 
face. He also sought expression for his own emotional nature. 
His personages are highstrung and nervous. In the few re- 
liefs of the Madonna and Child surely by his own hand and 


FIG. 164—DONATELLO. DAVID. BARGELLO, FLORENCE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


in the great number done by his immediate school, the yearn- 
ing maternal love becomes so intense as to be almost painful. 
The climax was reached in the principal works of his old 
age, the two bronze pulpits for 8. Lorenzo, Florence, both 
of them carried out very largely by pupils. The spaces are 
filled with surging throngs, whose figures, bowed beneath 
grief, terror, amazement, or adoration, are even crowded out 
behind or in front of the architectural divisions. With a 


302 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


kind of impressionism, his nervous energy now sought to 
seize and crystallize momentary impressions, and he had 
come to prefer bronze because it preserved the freshness of 
the clay model and permitted more rapid execution. 

His humanism. Amidst these eminently modern character- 
istics little place was left for any very vital influence of 
the antique, except in so far as it softened his realism and 
curbed his nervous energy. Its chief effect was to turn-him 
towards the nude. He began in his early works by relieving 
many parts of the body of the Pisan wrappings. In the 
bronze David (Fig. 164), done at the end of his first period 
or the beginning of the second, of his own volition he stripped 
the Hebrew hero of all drapery, thus overriding medieval 
prejudice and making an epoch with the first detached nude 
since the decay of classical art. 

His invention. It has already become evident that Dona- 
tello possessed the temperament of a bold innovator. The 
Gattamelata was the first large bronze equestrian statue of 
modern times. The putto or nude child, suggested by the 
pagan Cupids or funereal genii, had already been employed 
in the Renaissance as a decorative motif; but in his part on 
the font in the Baptistery at Siena he was the first to intro- 
duce it as a free-standing figure, and by utilizing it as the 
principal motif on his exterior pulpit at Prato and on the 
singing-gallery of the Florentine cathedral (now in the Mu- 
seum of the Opera del Duomo), he definitely established one 
of the loveliest elements in the art of the Quattrocento. He 
instituted ralievo schiacciato; and in mystic subjects (Fig. 
165) he adopted its depressed and indistinct outlines to gain 
the unearthly effect required by the themes. His mind was 
so fertile in invention that he chafed under the bonds of tra- 
ditional iconography: witness the utterly different but equally 
dramatic compositions for the Banquet of Herod in the 
bronze relief upon the Sienese font and in the marble relief 
of the Museum at Lille. 

His achievement. Even a casual review of Donatello’s 
career demonstrates the breadth of his genius. When he 
desired, the Annunciation in 8. Croce (Fig. 166) shows that 
he could be as graceful as Ghiberti, and that without affecta- 


303 


THE RENAISSANCE 


“SHIUVN 


‘ 


OTIN VY OTH9 


NV 


rs) 


IOOVON 


vud 


(IUVNITV ‘OLOHd) 
IVNIGUVO JO AWOL NO NOILdWASSV 


‘OTIALYNOG—GCQT ‘DIa 


304 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


tion; but he did not so far restrict himself to one kind of 
style that his personality can be defined by such phrases as 
the grace of Ghiberti or the robust vigor of Jacopo della 
Quercia. If it were necessary, however, to select and define 


FIG. 166—DONATELLO. ANNUNCIATION. S. CROCE. FLORENCE. (PHOTO. 
ALIN ARI) 


his outstanding contribution to the progress of art, the an- 
swer would be that he was the first since ancient-days, either 
in painting or sculpture, to free the human body from its 
medieval bonds, to realize its beauty as a thing in itself, 
and to demonstrate its significance as a plastic vehicle. 


THE RENAISSANCE 305 


Ghibertt. His works. Lorenzo Ghiberti (1378-1455) is 
known chiefly as the author of the seeond-and third bronze 
portals of the Florentine Baptistery. The second doors 
(1403-1424) are obviously based upon the prototype of 
Andrea Pisano. They are divided into the same number of 
twenty-eight compartments, the upper twenty containing the 
life of Christ and the lower eight the Evangelists and Latin 


FIG. 167—-GHIBERTI. PANEL REPRESENTING STORY OF ABRAHAM, EAST DOORS 
OF BAPTISTERY, FLORENCE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


Fathers. Although the complication is greater, the scenes 
still consist of comparatively few figures, and the accessories 
of setting are simple. For Andrea’s decorative border with 
accents of lions’ heads is substituted a delicate motif of ivy 
with accents of human heads which are imitated from an- 
tiques or studied from actuality. The outer jambs and lintel 
are adorned with a chain composed of garlands of richly 
varied foliage, flowers, and fruits, filled, like the inner border, 
with all manner of things creeping and flying. All these 


306 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


details are of Gothic derivation, but they sacrifice the partial 
conventionalization that the best Gothic artists deemed suit- 
able to the rigidity of architecture for botanical and zoological 
accuracy bred by the revival of scientific interest. In the 
third portal (1425-1452) (Fig. 167), he used for the episodes 
from the Old Testament ten much larger panels, following the 
old custom?! of compressing several scenes into the same 
frame. In accordance with the general tendency to elabora- 
tion manifested in the third doors, the inner border now in- 
cludes, besides the heads, statuettes of Hebrew worthies and 
of Sibyls, and the continuous wreath of the outer frame is 
more luxuriant. 

His style. Although in some respects Ghiberti was in 
sympathy with his times and owed much to humanism, he 
remained essentially a Gothic sculptor. In lines of body 
and drapery, he achieved the most exquisite Gothic elegance; 
but his forms differ from the earlier Gothic in that upon them 
is superimposed a desire for the beauty of the antique, which 
taught him classic restraint and prevented him from indulg- 
ing in violence of attitudes or expression through the counte- 
nance. To a less degree than in Donatello and yet unmistak- 
ably, the body acquires more importance than in ordinary 
Gothie sculpture; but even his many nudes are marked by the 
almost feminine grace that permeates his whole production. 
Other tendencies of the Renaissance were bound to color his 
style. It is true that as early as his relief (now in the Bar- 
gello) which won him the commission for the second doors 
he had already abjured the realism and emotionalism that 
distinguish Brunelleschi’s rival version of the same theme; 
but nevertheless with Ghiberti movement is always greater 
and more varied than with Andrea Pisano, and the members 
of groups and the decorative heads are differentiated in char- 
acter. The sphere of his most daring experimentation was 
the pictorial treatment of relief, which attains its extreme 
manifestation in the third doors. The setting becomes an 
elaborate landscape of rocks and foliage or a grandiose ex- 
panse of architecture. For the effect of a deep perspective, 


*Similar to the “continuous method of narration,” cf. pp. 23, 167, 
and 175, note 1. 


THE RENAISSANCE 307 


he uses a series of many planes, gradually diminishing in 
height of relief until they vanish into the background and 
so merging into one another that they create rather the 
illusion of one continuously receding plane. Purists in 
esthetics have objected to the pictorial treatment because it 
confuses the aims of painting and sculpture and because per- 
spective of landscape can- 
not be so convincingly ren- 
dered in the mediums of 
sculpture as in the gradated 
colors of painting. In any 
ease, Ghiberti’s achieve- 
ment in this method was so 
transcendent that ever 
since his example has been 
often followed. 

The inauguration of the 
type of Renaissance tomb. 
Bernardo Rossellino (1409- 
1464) has usually been con- 
sidered the author of the 
tomb of Leonardo Bruni in 
S. Croce, Florence (1444) 
(Fig. 168), but a recent hy- 
pothesis, without any defi- 
nite proof, ascribes to the 
architect Leon Battista Al- 
berti the design of the 
monument and leaves to 
Rossellino only the execu- FIG. 168—BERNARDO ROSSELLINO. TOMB 
tion. The tombs by Dona- oF tonarvo BRUNI. §. CROCE, FLOR- 
tello and Michelozzo had E=NcE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 
been merely medieval 
forms adorned with motifs of the Renaissance repertoire. 
The sepulchre of Leonardo Bruni, though it borrowed certain 
elements from Donatello and Michelozzo, was, taken as a 
whole, a new invention, of such stately beauty that it hence- 
forth imposed itself upon the Quattrocento, and with certain 
modifications, upon the Cinquecento. 


308 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Luca della Robbia. Like the other great sculptors of the 
first half of the. Quattrocento, Luca della Robbia (1399 or 
1400-1482) made a new contribution to the progress of art, 
a method of glazing terracotta with shining enamel of differ- 
ent colors, which he developed with such distinction that it 
enjoyed a phenomenal popularity, especially in the hands 
of the later members of his family’s workshop. His color- 
scheme was always simple and restrained. The figures are 


FIG. 169—LUCA DELLA ROBBIA. MADONNA AND ANGELS. BARGELLO, FLOR- 
ENCE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


white, delicately and sparsely accented with gold and set 
against a blue background. The hues are more varied only 
in decorative detail, such as the encircling wreaths of flowers 
and fruit, or in the heraldry of escutcheons. For the red 
glaze that it was impossible to obtain, violets, purples, and 
brown were substituted, and later real red was merely painted 
in. His style was no more complex than his color. He has 
little intellectuality or reminiscence of the antique. His 
simplicity, however, was illumined by the light of an acute 


THE RENAISSANCE 309 


artistic sense, and he also possessed that rarest of gifts, the 
ability to express intense and tender religious devotion with- 
out sacrificing the majesty suited to divine personages and 
without passing into the region of the sentimental. He be- 
gan in the more usual mediums and continued to employ them 
at times throughout his life. His rightly -most popular 
achievement in marble is the singing-gallery of the Florentine 
cathedral, now reconstructed in the Opera del Duomo. The 
passionate rush of Donatello’s companion piece is softened 
down into groups of children, arranged in separate panels and 
illustrating the verses of the CL psalm, in which humanity is 
called upon to praise God in different kinds of music. Con- 
crete instances of his simple manner are the symmetrical 
composition in several of the panels and the avoidance of 
pictorial perspective. In bronze his most inspired religious 
style is represented by the doors of one of the sacristies in 
the cathedral of Florence, consisting of panels, each contain- 
ing the Virgin, the Baptist, or one of the Evangelists or 
Fathers, between two angels. In glazed terracotta, his most 
beloved works are his numerous representations of the Ma- 
donna and Child (Fig. 169), sometimes more austere and 
hieratic, sometimes more human and familiar. He also em- 
ployed the medium very effectively for architectural decora- 
tion, as especially in the medallions of Apostles on the walls 
and of St. Andrew over the entrance to the Pazzi Chapel, 
Florence, and in coats of arms and their surrounding wreaths. 


2. The Second Half of the Quattrocento 
a. The Cultivators of Sentiment 


Andrea della Robbia. Confining himself almost wholly to 
glazed terracotta, Andrea della Robbia (1435-1525) in most 
respects clung so faithfully to Luca’s principles that the di- 
versities between them are the more apparent. Most sig- 
nificantly, he introduced sentiment. into his uncle’s themes. 
In what is usually reckoned an early commission, the medal- 
lions for the loggia of the Hospital of the Innocenti at Flor- 


310 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


ence, the infants! already incline to be winsome. Affected, 
perhaps, by the contemporary cult of Neoplatonism and by 
a devotion to the teachings of Savonarola, Andrea bestowed: 
upon his personages, especially the Virgin, a wistful and mel- 
ancholy mysticism. With a Neoplatonic yearning towards 
the skies, he gave his subjects a more distinctly spiritual and 
heavenly tone by employing haloes, by flecking the back- 


FIG. 170—ANDREA DELLA ROBBIA. ALTARPIECE. 8. MARIA DEGLI ANGELI, 
ASSISI 


ground with clouds, and by surrounding his sacred person- 
ages with flights of angels. A tendency to elaboration is 
evident everywhere in his production. With the precedent 
of probably not more than one instance in the work of his 
uncle, he extended the use of glazed terracotta to whole altar- 


*Four of the fourteen infants, the pairs in the spandrels of the 
arches at the two ends of the loggia, are modern imitations. 


| THE RENAISSANCE dll 


pieces (Fig. 170). He sought pictorial effects of landscape in 
this medium, he extended the gamut of color, and indulged in 
more gilding. Ornamentation became excessive, and under 
the influence of the school of extreme Realists, the draperies 
were more involved. The tendencies to degeneration in the 
manipulation of the ware already apparent in Andrea della 
Robbia were carried still further by his son Giovanni (1469- 


1529 or 1530). 


FIG. 171—DESIDERIO DA SETTIGNANO. MADONNA AND CHILD. PALAZZO 
PANCIATICHI, FLORENCE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


__ Desiderio da Settignano. The most exquisite sculptor of 
the Quattrocento was Desiderio da Settignano (1428-1464). 
Though perhaps a pupil of Donatello, and certainly influ- 
enced by him, he did not inherit all the sides of that master’s 
universal personality. What he did acquire was Donatello’s 
supreme technical skill, and within his chosen sphere, which 
was restricted to the sweet and pleasant aspects of existence, 


312 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


he was without a peer. He clothed his skill in aristocratic 
elegance, and applied it to the expression of a light and happy 
temperament. In his most monumental work, the tomb of 
Carlo Marsuppini, in S. Croce (1455), opposite Bruni’s 
mausoleum, upon which it is modelled, he revealed his char- 
acter by rendering Rossellino’s sepulchral type less solemn 
and more graceful. His sensitive nature, as in his representa- 
tions of the Virgin and Child (Fig. 171), spontaneously fell 
into Donatello’s rilievo schiacciato. In his tabernacle for 
the Sacrament in S. Lorenzo, Florence, the treatment of the 
central panel in perspective as if it were a chapel leading to 
an inner shrine, even if anticipated by Bernardo Rossellino, 
was so beautiful that it established an important precedent 
in the Renaissance for these articles of ecclesiastical furni- 
ture. In his many effigies of children, his elegant tempera- 
ment found delight, not, like Donatello, in their unrestrained 
expression of emotion or, like Luca della Robbia, in their 
robust innocence, but in the gentleness of their natures and 
the delicate lines of their young forms. Among the most 
characteristic of these productions should be mentioned the 
bust of the young St. John Baptist in the chapel of the 
Vanchetoni, Florence, the laughing putto in the Benda Col- 
lection, Vienna, and the tondo relief of the young Christ 
and St. John in the Arconati-Visconti Collection of the 
Louvre. The soft outlines of highly cultured ladies, as in 
the bust of the so-called Princess of Urbino in the Kaiser 
Friedrich Museum, Berlin, also offered an opportunity to 
Desiderio’s refined chisel. 

Mino da Fiesole. Mino da Fiesole (1430 or 1431-1484) has 
gained a reputation of which he was unworthy. His name 
has become a talisman for that delicate charm of Florentine 
sculpture at its height which was actually represented by 
Desiderio. The popular misconception of him is due to two 
causes, the false ascription to him of works by other mastérs 
and the ingenuous sweetness which, breathing through his 
whole production, wheedles us into forgetting his defects. 
He possessed also certain minor alleviating traits, such as 
the exquisiteness with which he carved architectural detail. 
But in the nobler qualities of sculpture he was lamentably 


THE RENAISSANCE 313 


inadequate. He exaggerated the chief quality of the man 
who most influenced him: where Desiderio was delicate, Mino 
was dainty. He was ignorant of anatomy, and his modelling 
was sometimes even puerile. Many artists of the period 
gave their drapery decorative mannerisms, but Mino’s folds 
are too stiff and too far removed from actuality. Bad enough 
in single figures, he was worse in the relative proportions of 


FIG. 172—MINO DA FIESOLE. ALTAR. BADIA, FLORENCE, (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


several objects and in the representation of pictorial back- 
ground when it came to the complicated problems of per- 
spective in scenes from sacred history. Characteristic speci- 
mens of his work are the two altars in the cathedral of Fiesole 
and in the Badia of Florence (Fig. 172). The Dance of 
Salome, one of three panels that he did for the indoor pulpit 
of the principal church at Prato, is a shocking instance of his 
faults in episodical relief and of his lack of religious serious- 
ness. His masterpiece is perhaps the monument of Count 


314 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Hugo von Andersburg in 
the Badia, Florence, a 
modification of Desiderio’s 
sepulchral type. At Rome, 
where he was very popular, 
he usually collaborated on 
altars and tombs (ef. Fig. 
184) with greater sculptors 
than he, Andrea Bregno and 
the Dalmatian, Giovanni 
da Traut. 

Agostino di Duccio. In 
this group of cultivators of 
sentiment may be placed 
one of Donatello’s pupils, 
Agostino di Duccio (1418- 
1481), who was essentially 
a decorator. From his 
master he derived his 
rilievo schiacciato, and 
from a study of Neo-Attic 
remains his disposition of 
transparent drapery in mi- 
nute pleats and great swirls. 
This style he utilized for 
the adornment of architec- 
ture, always willing to sub- 
ordinate realistic correct- 
ness, for which he had no 
talent, to his love of decora- 
tive undulating line and to 
the effective filling of the 
spaces. In his sacrifice of 
representation to calli- 

graphic design and in his 
FIG. 173—AGOSTINO DI DUCCIO. Pa- . 
TIENCE OR OBEDIENCE. §. BERNARDINO, devotion to ethereal and 
PERUGIA. (PHOTO. ALINARI) languishing feminine types, 
he was a lesser Botticelli. 
His two great undertakings were the embellishment of the 


THE RENAISSANCE 315 


interior of 8. Francesco at Rimini (according to the orna- 
mental scheme planned by the medallist, Matteo dei Pasti) 
and of the facade of 8. Bernardino at Perugia (Fig. 173). 


b. The Extreme Realists 


Antonio Pollaiuolo and Verrocchio distinguished themselves 
in painting as well as in sculpture. In the latter art, both 


FIG. 174—ANTONIO POLLAIUOLO. HERCULES AND ANTASUS. BARGELLO, - 
FLORENCE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


preferred the medium of bronze for the same reasons as 
Donatello in his last period and because it allowed more ac- 
curacy in detail. They were affected only very superficially 
by the antique, for instance in details of costume and archi- 


tecture. 
Pollaiuolo. Antonio Pollaiuolo (14382-1498) usually com- 


316 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


bined in his productions (Fig. 174) his two chief interests, 
the scientific investigation of artistic anatomy and the repre- 
sentation of violent movement. By some magic of genius 
he was able to change his most unequivocal studies into works 
of art. A part of their appeal consists in the tremendous 
energy with which he endowed the physiques until the spec- 
tator himself feels that he is participating in the muscular 
strain. His training in the goldsmith’s profession, even more 
than was usually the case with Florentine artists, inculcated 
a wonderful precision and delicacy. His greatest commission 
in sculpture, the bronze tomb of Sixtus IV, now removed from 
St. Peter’s to the new papal museum of sculpture, differs 
widely from the customary Italian sepulchres of the period. A 
superb portrait statue of the pope, surrounded by reliefs of 
the Virtues, lies upon an elevated base with sloping sides, 
which is embellished with reliefs of the Liberal Arts. In the 
lightly clad allegorical figures, he now extended his investiga- 
tion to the feminine nude. The difficulty of the concave 
surface in which the Liberal Arts are set was great enough, 
but he contorted the bodies, as well as those of the Virtues, in 
order to satisfy his craving to-solve the most abstruse prob- 
lems. Not content with the ordinary phases of reality, he 
chose those eccentric feminine types with long legs and short 
waists which he transmitted to Botticelli, and he arranged the 
drapery in complicated patterns. 

Verrocchw. Andrea del Verrocchio (1485-1488) brought 
to its apogee the realism that Donatello had championed. 
Except for his superior Italian esthetic sensibility, his art 
recalls vividly the realistic German sculpture of his time. 
Donatello in his David had forgotten a little his passion for 
realism in a desire to reduplicate the success of the ancients in 
the treatment of the nude; Verrocchio in his bronze David, 
now also in the Bargello, has reproduced with unsparing 
truth the wiry young athlete of the fields. A still more 
impressive opportunity for comparison with Donatello is 
afforded by the equestrian statue of the condottiere, Bar- 
tolommeo Colleoni (Fig. 175). Verrocchio has not, like 
Donatello, clothed his captain in the personality of a Roman 
general; he has boldly presented him, as he might actually 


THE RENAISSANCE 317 


have appeared, compelling his troops by his iron will and 
eagle’s glance. He has also given to horse and rider alike one 
of those vigorous poses in which Pollaiuolo excelled and in 
which there seems to be stored up all the powerful energy of 
the young Renaissance. Few critics would dispute the justice 
of calling Verrocchio’s achievement the greatest equestrian 


FIG. 175—VERROCCHIO. COLLEONI. VENICE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


group in the world. His realism is as apparent in the boy 
with a dolphin now over a fountain in the court of the 
Palazzo Vecchio, Florence. A comparison with Desiderio’s 
ethereal children is all that is necessary to prove the point. 
The bronze group of Christ and the doubting Thomas in a 
niche on the Or San Michele is interesting, because it has 
fallen victim to the general European disease of the fifteenth 
century, the involution and indentation of the drapery for the 


318 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


sake of chiaroscuro; but we forget details in the solemn 
majesty of the postures, which becomes more tangible by a 
comparison with the figures 
of the Sentimentalists or 
even of Benedetto da Mai- 
ano. The terracotta Ma- 
donna of the Bargello (Fig. 
176) reveals that, when he 
would, he could be as aris- 
tocratically elegant as De- 
siderio. In his one unques- 
tionably genuine portrait 
bust, the marble lady of 
the Bargello, he surpassed 
the delicacy of Desiderio in 
the modelling of the hands 
and the dexterity of Mino 
in the counterfeiting of 
fabrics. Both in the Ma- 
donna and the portrait, all 

- these qualities have a 
FIG. 176—VERROCCHIO. MADONNA AND 


CHILD. BARGELLO, FLORENCE. (PHOTO. greater effect upon the 
ALIN ARI) spectator because they are 


only auxiliaries to the gen- 
eral impression and are bestowed upon figures that possess 
more reality. 


ce. The Group Intermediate between the Sentimentalists and 
Realists ; 


Antonio Rossellino. Similar in nature to Desiderio, An- 
tonio Rossellino (1427-1478) compensated for lesser technical 
delicacy by a wider range of subject and was successful in 
episodical and dramatic reliefs. His figures are more solid 
and real than Desiderio’s, and he preserved his brother Ber- 
nardo’s religious sobriety in facial expression; but his forms 
were often more animated than those of either of the two 
sculptors to whom he was most closely related. The little 


e 


THE RENAISSANCE 319 


St. John in the Bargello is a striking contrast to Desiderio’s 
hothouse products. The bust of the philosopher, Matteo 
Palmieri (Fig. 177), exhibits the unsparing realistic power of 
this group of sculptors when they undertook portraits. Like 
Bernardo and Desiderio, Antonio achieved renown by a great 
mausoleum, that of the 
young Cardinal of Portugal 
in the Florentine church of 
S. Miniato, deepening the 
recess into a kind of mor- 
tuary chamber. The lovely 
relief of the Nativity in 
the church of Monte Oli- 
veto at Naples applies to 
marble Ghiberti’s pictorial 
perspective. Antonio Ros- 
sellino treated the same 
theme in the round in a 
beautiful group in_ the 
Metropolitan Museum. 
At the end of his life, he 
joined the vanguard of 
¢ FIG. 177—ANTONIO ROSSELLINO. BUST 
those who abandoned the OF MATTEO PALMIERI. BARGELLO, FLOR- 
emaciated bodies of the xENcE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 
Realists and the over-deli- 
cate forms of the Sentimentalists, and he began to show a pre- 
dilection for the more robust figures of ancient art. 
Benedetto da Mariano, Antonio Rossellino’s follower, 
Benedetto da Maiano (1442-1497), cultivated realism more 
assiduously, and amplified the forms still farther, especially 
in his late works, accentuating the tendency by swathing the 
lower parts of the body in yards of drapery. His most cele- 
brated piece is the pulpit of S. Croce, Florence, with reliefs 
from the story of St. Francis. It is marked by the greater 
richness of architectural decoration that is one of Bene- 
detto’s traits, signalizing the less chaste spirit of the later 
Quattrocento. In the works of his last years, such as the 
altar of the Annunciation in the church of Monte Oliveto, 
Naples, under increased classical influence he partly sacri- 


320 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


ficed, like Andrea della Robbia, the freshness of the Quattro- 
cento and became rather dry and empty. His busts, for in- 
stance that of Pietro Mellini in the Bargello, are among the 
best of the period. 


C. SCULPTURE OUTSIDE OF FLORENCE 


The new style of the Renaissance was disseminated 
throughout the rest of Italy very largely by Florentine mas- 
ters, especially Donatello. 


1. Siena 


Jacopo della Quercia. Siena’s one boast in sculpture, 
Jacopo della Quercia (c. 1375?-1438), although he retained 
much Gothic feeling, was not Sienese in temperament. His 
personality is best expressed in the Virgin, Virtues, and 
scenes from the Old Testament, originally forming the Fonte 
Gaia at Siena but now removed to the Palazzo Pubblico for 
the safer keeping of the battered fragments that remain, and 
in the culminating works of his life, the statues of the Virgin 
and saints and the reliefs from Genesis and the infancy of 
Christ (Fig. 178) that he began in 1425 for the main portal 
of 8. Petronio at Bologna. He here appeared as the truest 
precursor of Michael Angelo. An ardent lover of the nude, 
he chose powerful figures as of a race of supermen, and 
breathed into them passionate strength. One of his devices 
for imbuing his forms with a mighty energy was the trans- 
formation of the Gothic slouch into a violent backward and 
sideward thrust; the Virtues at Siena and the one bronze 
relief executed by him on the font that he himself designed in 
the Sienese Baptistery show how he could coerce magnificent 
sweeps of drapery into performing an emotional office. Un- 
like Ghiberti and Donatello, he admitted only a few large 
figures to his reliefs, and reducing the details of setting to. 
their lowest terms, scorned almost entirely the pictorial treat- 
ment. Living at the dawn of the Renaissance and influenced 
by his Gothic predecessor, Nicola d’Apulia, Jacopo was 


THE RENAISSANCE 321 


somewhat indebted to Hellenistic art, especially for his re- 
habilitation of the nude. In the case of both artists the 
predilection for the massive may have been induced by the 
old tradition of central Italy, which is recognizable in ancient 
Etruscan art and in the Romanesque pulpits. In marked 
contrast with Jacopo’s usual agitated style is the tomb of 


FIG. 178—JACOPO DELLA QUERCIA. SIN OF ADAM AND EVE. PORTAL OF S. 
PETRONIO, BOLOGNA 


Ilaria del Carretto in the cathedral of Lucca, one of the su- 
preme works of the Renaissance and his earliest known ef- 
fort. The loveliness of the sleep of death has never been ren- 
dered with more classic tranquillity. On the base, bearing 
funereal wreaths, are the first important nude puttz of the 
period. The French type of monument, the foreign costume, 
above all the wide departure from Jacopo’s ordinary man- 
ner, have led Professor Marquand to doubt the justness of 
the ascription. 


322 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Later in the century, Siena produced a good deal of respect- 
able sculpture directly or indirectly inspired by Donatello. 


2. Lombardy 


It was only in the second half of the Quattrocento that 
Lombard sculpture rose to real importance in the Renaissance. 


FIG. 179—STYLE OF THE MANTEGAZZA. ST. JAMES. FACADE OF THE 
CERTOSA, PAVIA 


The style that was evolved was based upon the Florentine, 
amalgamated with Teutonic elements and distinguished by 
the luxuriance of its architectural detail. Except at Florence, 
indeed, sculpture during the fifteenth century was still looked 
upon as an embellishment of architecture, and little interest 
was manifested in free-standing statues. If the Lombard 
masters lacked the good taste and accuracy of the Floren- 
tines, they partially atoned by their brilliant invention. 


THE RENAISSANCE 323 


The Mantegazza. The production of Amadeo may be 
_ taken as representative of the kind of sculpture that was 
being executed by many other Lombard sculptors of less 
renown, but a necessary preliminary to a discussion of his 
achievement is a consideration of the problem connected with 
the two brothers, Cristoforo and Antonio Mantegazza, who 
may have influenced him. Although it is impossible to at- 
tribute with certainty any one piece of sculpture to the 
brothers, it has become customary to ascribe to them a pe- 
culiar style that appeared in northern Italy in the latter part 
of the century. How far we are justified in this conjecture is 
a question. The style is exemplified in some parts of the 
facade of the Certosa near Pavia (Fig. 179), and we know 
that both of the Mantegazza labored here with Amadeo. But 
since the peculiarities are only exaggerations of elements in 
Amadeo’s ordinary style, it may be that Amadeo himself pro- 
duced these parts of the facade and other pieces of sculpture 
of the same sort, in the extravagant moments to which he was 
only too susceptible, or that his pupils are responsible, accen- 
tuating eccentricities that they found in their master’s works. 
The bodies are often emaciated and elongated to the last 
degree, and yet even these impossible forms, especially the 
countenances, are rendered with a harsh realism. The neu- 
rotic figures and heads are infused with a painful intensity of 
emotional expression. The draperies, which are broken into 
a large number of minute, protuberant, and sharp-edged 
folds, have a distinctly metallic quality. 

Amadeo. The production of Giovanni Antonio Amadeo (or 
Omodeo) of Pavia (1447-1522) demonstrates that no more 
than in Tuscany was there any sudden break with the tra- 
dition of the Middle Ages. Within the mortuary chapel of 
Bartolommeo Colleoni that he built as an annex to 8. Maria 
Maggiore at Bergamo, the tomb that he made for the 
condottiere himself (Fig. 180) is an elaboration of the sepul- 
chral form employed in the medieval shrine of St. Peter 
Martyr at Milan. His figures are plainly reminiscent of the 
Gothic sculptors from Campione. The women, especially, 
have the same long, cylindrical necks and the same round 
heads with the hair bound close about the top and bursting 


324 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


in a circle of heavy curls over the shoulders. <A certain 
Teutonism may perhaps be traced in the characteristics that 
he shares with the works ascribed to the Mantegazza, an 
obtuseness to physical beauty, a frequent elongation of the 
members of the body, and a leaning towards passionate inten- 
sity. His puttz lack Donatello’s anatomical correctness and 
nervous energy, but no one has ever realized the charm of 
childhood with more variety. His incorrectness is not con- 


FIG. 180—AMADEO. DETAIL OF TOMB OF COLLEONI. COLLEONI CHAPEL, S. 
MARIA MAGGIORE, BERGAMO. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


fined to the putt:. He enthusiastically attempted difficult 
perspective and foreshortenings, but seldom with success. The 
anatomical defects into which he sometimes falls in adult 
figures are perhaps intentional, as in the case of certain 
other Lombard artists, for the sake of exotic effects in 
which the Lombard temperament seems occasionally to have 
revelled. He often resorted to a peculiar method of relief 
that was very popular in northern Italy during the Quattro- 


THE RENAISSANCE 325 


cento and was occasionally essayed in other parts of the 
peninsula. The figures in the foreground, though themselves 
kept in low relief, are undercut and almost detached so as 
to cast shadows and create an effect of chiaroscuro. _Since 
Amadeo had a predilection for sharp outlines and therefore 
very commonly chose the profile position, the forms often 
look as if they had been stuck upon the background. The 
list of his most characteristic works, carried out with the ex- 
tensive codperation of assistants, includes: at Bergamo, the 
tombs of Colleoni and his daughter and the exquisite adorn- 
ment of the facade of the chapel with the exuberant decora- 
tive repertoire of Lombard architecture; at the Certosa of 
Pavia (where he did much carving both on the exterior and 
the interior, but where his exact participation is hard to 
define), especially the door leading from the Minor Cloister 
to the church, some of the lovely little angels above the 
capitals of this cloister, and on the facade of the church, 
the reliefs of the Raising of Lazarus, Christ among the Doc- 
tors, the Nativity, and the Epiphany; the tomb of Giovanni 
and Vitaliano Borromeo in the chapel on the Isola Bella; 
and the shrine of St. Lanfranc in the church of the same name 
near Pavia. 


3. Venice 


Venetian sculpture was less significant than Venetian 
painting, which better embodied the taste of the city for 
color and display. In all phases of art and culture, Venice 
freed herself from medievalism less quickly than Florence. 
The greatest native sculptors of the first half of the Quattro- 
cento, Giovanni Buon and his son, Bartolommeo, evolved a 
manner that belonged half to the Gothic and half to the 
Renaissance. In the second part of the century, when the 
Renaissance was more definitely established at Venice, a 
potent Lombard influence united itself with the Florentine. 
The Lombard sculptors were much more numerous than the 
indigenous masters, but they tended to adany themselves to 
the city’s atmosphere. 

Rizzo. The typical Venetian sculptor of the Quattrocento 
was Antonio Rizzo (d. 1499 or 1500). His figures are, to 


326 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


a certain extent, inherited from the Campionesi, but they are 
less meticulous and nobler than those of Amadeo. The 
drapery takes grander sweeps, has deeper indentations, and 
is not tainted by the Man- 
tegazza peculiarities. In 
the sepulchral field, his at- 
tainments are well exempli- 
fied by the tomb of the 
Doge Niccolo Tron in the 
church of the Frari, upon 
which he collaborated with 
Lombards, apparently exe- 
cuting at least the two Vir- 
tues beside the erect statue 
of the Doge at the bottom 
and, of the two jaunty 
pages, the one at the left. 
On Venetian tombs war- 
rlors or pages were com- 
monly substituted for the 
Florentine putti as bearers 
of escutcheons. In the nude 
Eve (Fig. 181), one of the 
statues that he did for the 
Arco Foseari in the Ducal 
Palace, he embodied ade- 
quately the Venetian _con- 
ception of feminine beauty, 
which in its voluptuousness 
varied essentially from the 
chaster and more emaci- 
FIG. 181—ANTONIO RIzz0. EVE. pucaL ated Florentine type. Dif- 
PALACE, VENICE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) ferent from the nobler and 
more idealized Hellenic 

type, it was to become as lovely in the magic hands of the 
painters Giorgione and Titian. The narrow, sloping shoul- 
ders, the emphasis upon the abdomen, the cast of counte- 
nance, and the greater naturalism in comparison with the 
feminine nudes of Florence, denote, as in Lombardy, a Teu- 


THE RENAISSANCE 327 


tonic influence, whether German or Flemish, living on, at 
Venice, from the late Middle Ages. 

The Lombardi. Of the Lombard invasion, the chief repre- 
sentative was Pietro Lombardo, active at Venice at least as 
early as 1462. His style is 
less vigorous, less individ- 
ual, and more monotonous 
than Amadeo’s, betraying 
both Florentine influence 
and traces of the Mante- 
_gazza drapery. His mauso- 
leum for Pietro Mocenigo 
in SS. Giovanni e Paolo 
(Fig. 182) is an impressive 
example of Venetian pride 
in its transmutation of the 
central section beneath the 
great arch into a triumphal 
procession. The greatest 
architectural and_ sculp- 
tural undertaking of Pie- 
tro Lombardo, his sons An- 
tonio and Tullio (who were 
also masters of distinc- 
tion), and his bottega was 
the gem-like church of S. 
Maria dei Miracoli, a fit- 
ting witness to the Vene- 
tian love of splendor. Its FI. 182—PIETRO LOMBARDO. TOMB OF 

: : : PIETRO MOCENIGO. SS. GIOVANNI E 
walls, without and within, PAOLO, VENICE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 
are completely covered by 
a rich incrustation of marbles, and the plastic decoration 
runs the whole Lombard gamut. 


4. Emilia 


The peculiarity of Emilian sculpture was a predilection 
for groups of large detached figures in painted clay or terra- 
cotta, constituting Holy Sepulchres or other sacred subjects 


328 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


and treated with the utmost naturalism so as to give the 
illusion of breathing personages. The first example in Emilia, 
the Piet§ in S. Maria della Vita, Bologna, was executed in 
1463 by a master from the south, Niccolo da Bari (or dell’- 
Arca, d. 1494), who perhaps had visited Burgundy and seen 
there the Gothic Sepulchres. The most distinguished Emilian 
sculptor, Guido Mazzoni (1450-1518), may be studied in the 
Holy Sepulchre in 8. Giovanni della Buona Morte, Modena, 


FIG. 183—MAZZONI. NATIVITY. CATHEDRAL, MODENA. (PHOTO, ANDERSON) 


and in the Nativity (Fig. 183) in the crypt of the cathedral 
of the same town. He is extremely realistic, introducing 
contemporary costume more often than Niccolo, and excelling 
in the rendering of the epidermis; but he is less frantic in~ 
his expression of grief and frequently sacrifices both realism 
and emotion to a feeling for beauty of form, countenance, 
and pose. He helped to spread the Renaissance by finally 
emigrating to France under Charles VIII. The technique 
of clay was adapted to the style of the Cinquecento by An- 


THE RENAISSANCE 329 


tonio Begarelli (d. 1565). In his work the realism of Maz- 
zoni has largely,.though not wholly, given way to an idealism 
that cultivates Raphael’s translation of ancient forms and 
costumes; and the compositions are more pictorial. His most 
celebrated and pretentious composition is the group of the 
Deposition from the Cross in 8. Francesco, Modena. The 
- Madonna in glory with four saints below, in S. Pietro, 
Modena, is an absolute transcription of the kind of painting 
done by Raphael and his pupils. 


5. Rome 


Artistic conditions in Rome, especially the constant change 
of pontiffs, prevented during the Quattrocento the formation 
of any essentially Roman school. Several Italian sculptors 
who came from other places to work in the capital of Chris- 
tendom have already been mentioned, and there now remains 
for discussion the Lombard Andrea Bregno (1421-1506), 
who was the chief personality in mortuary commissions at 
Rome, often collaborating with his followers and with other 
masters, such as Mino da Fiesole and Giovanni da Traut. 
He was a really great sculptor, whose high merits have not 
yet been properly appreciated. Through the classic influence 
of Rome he evolved a much soberer and less mannered style 
than his compatriots Amadeo and the Mantegazza. Here 
and there one discerns a slight reminiscence of the peculiar 
Lombard drapery, but the figures have none of the Mante- 
gazza’s elongation and are free from nervous agitation. With 
exquisiteness and high finish he introduced the plenitude of 
the Lombard decorative repertoire into his tombs, but he 
used it with a restraint that cannot be paralleled in its home 
in the north. Occasionally, also, he ennobled suggestions in 
form and drapery derived from his partner, Mino. From the 
precedents of Florence and Rome he created three types of 
tombs that were often imitated by others. In the first type, 
the most magnificent specimen of which is the monument of 
the Cardinal Pietro Riario in the church of the SS. Apostolli, 
the architrave cast so heavy a shadow that the relief or 
- painting in the background could not be clearly seen. Bregno 


330 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


FIG. 184—ANDREA BREGNO. 


DEL POPOLO, ROME, 


MADONNA BY MINO DA FIESOLE. 


TOMB OF CRISTOFORO DELLA ROVERE. 8S. MARIA 


(PHOTO. ANDERSON) 


THE RENAISSANCE 331 


therefore devised two new types, modifying the old in such 
a way as to obviate the difficulty. First, as in the sepulchre 
of Raffaello della Rovere in the 8S. Apostoli, he simply left 
out the relief altcgether and thus made the compartment into 
a low cell. Another and the best way to avoid the difficulty 
was to substitute the Florentine arch for the entablature, 
and this he did on the tomb of the Cardinal Cristoforo della 
Rovere in 8. Maria del Popolo (Fig. 184), filling the arch, 
as at Florence, with the Madonna (executed by Mino) and 
adoring angels. He also produced a series of splendid altars, 
suggested by the triumphal arch. In the cathedral of Siena, 
the altar of Francesco Piccolomini, itself largely by his own 
hand, is enclosed in a kind of little apse, the architectural 
forms of which are Bregno’s but the sculpture of which was 
executed in great part by Michael Angelo and others. 


6. Southern Italy 


Like Rome, the kingdom of Naples and Sicily failed to 
develop any great indigenous schools of sculpture, and im- 
portant commissions had to be turned over to masters 
from other regions. Of these, the chief was the Dalmatian 
Francesco Laurana (c. 1425-c. 1502). There is no sure 
knowledge of him until 1458, when we find him employed at 
Naples upon the Triumphal Arch erected by King Alfonso I 
before the Castel Nuovo. He certainly was already conver- 
sant with Lombard and perhaps Florentine sculpture. The 
rest of his life he divided between Sicily (1467-1472), where 
his style found many imitators, the mainland of Italy, and 
southern France (1461-1466 and again from 1476 until his 
death). In regard to the distribution of labor on the 
Neapolitan Arch between him and the numerous other 
sculptors, there is no consensus of opinion. The most sig- 
nificant works that he left in Sicily are several lovely statues 
of the standing Madonna and Child, which, embodying the 
same haunting feminine type that appears in his busts, set 
the standard for this theme in the island. A charming ex- 
ample may be seen in the Church of the Crucifixion at Noto, 
signed and dated 1471. The chief relics of his activity in 


332 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


France, both from his latter days and both probably in- 
cluding the extensive collaboration of his atelier, are the 
tabernacle of St. Lazarus in the Old Cathedral of Marseilles 
and the relief of the Via Dolorosa in St. Didier, Avignon. 
The most characteristic expression of his chisel is his series 
of feminine busts. That of Battista Sforza in the Bargello, 


FIG. 185—FRANCESCO LAURANA. “BEATRICE” BUST. MUSEO NAZIONALE, 
PALERMO. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


Florence, stands apart in its somewhat greater individualiza- 
tion. Attempts have been made to distinguish different 
ladies even among the others; but since with a certain 
idealization Laurana conforms the features to his own stand- 
ard of womanly beauty and to his geometric treatment of the 
countenance, all these others (Fig. 185) look very much alike, 
and are perhaps rightly considered idealized portraits of 


THE RENAISSANCE 333 


Beatrice, the second daughter of Ferdinand of Aragon, 
multiplied by the master as decorative objects for private 
palaces. Among the sculptors of the Quattrocento, Laurana 
was the linealist. He models his surfaces very slightly, and 
obtains his effects through lovely lines and their contrasts. 
Botticelli has demonstrated that, by a curious but not in- 
explicable psychological phenomenon, the desire for expres- 
Siveness seems to go with the temperament of the linealist. 
So it is that Laurana excels in rendering the mysterious sub- 
tleties of the feminine soul. His delicacy and sentiment sug- 
gest an analogy to Desiderio, but the Florentine by birth and 
environment was naturally more concerned with realistic 
modelling, more vigorous, and, in his feminine busts, not 
content with such simple means. From a sculptor with an 
endowment like Laurana’s we must not expect dramatic 
scenes or ability to group figures; when he attempts these 
things, as at Avignon, he is likely to make a fiasco. He was 
great enough, however, to realize his limitations, and, like 
Desiderio, he confined himself ordinarily to themes suited to 
his genius. 


D. THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY IN ITALY 
1. Introduction 


One of the factors that operated most powerfully to dif- 
ferentiate the art of the Cinquecento from that of the Quat-" 
trocento was the much augmented tendency to reproduce the 
antique. For the realism and individualization of the fifteenth 
eentury were partially substituted the idealization and gen- 
eralization of the classic past. Although because of de- 
pendence upon ancient models artists in the sixteenth century 
were less faithful to the essentials of nature than in the fif- 
teenth, they required that their figures should have a closer 
superficial resemblance to actuality; and they repudiated 
those eccentricities which were due to the readiness of the 
Quattrocento to subordinate the literal fact to other higher 
purposes, such as expressiveness, the emaciation of asceticism, 
decoration, the feeling of solidity, and beautiful lines. The 


334 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


underlying thought, which since the beginnings of Christian- 
ity had been the chief concern of the artist, was now largely 
sacrificed to the cult of the body. One corollary of this 
change was the increased predilection for the nude, often 
imbued with a sensuality bred by resuscitated paganism. 
Another was the choice of those more robust forms of classical 
art which had been evolved as suitable to the themes rep- 
resented by the ancients but had little relation to the content 
of Christianity. Relief lost the great favor that it had 
enjoyed, and separate statues in the round gained accordingly. 
The exuberant decorative repertoire of the Quattrocento 
yielded to the severer_de- 
tails of antiquity. Not 
only did the artist give up 
expressing in the features 
the mentality of the per- 
sons represented, but he did > 
not infuse his productions, 
to such a degree, with his 
own individuality. Hence 
the frequency with which 
we must apply the adjec- 
tives “cold” and “empty” 
to the sculpture of this 
period. The simplicity and 
directness of the Quattro- 
cento succumbed to the 
grandiose and pompous, to 
the affected and. melodra- 
matic. ‘The output of Italy 
grew more and more aca- 
demic, concerned with 
mere technical dexterity. 
OF ASCANIO MARIA SFORZA. S. MARIA The Cinquecento, however, 
DEL POPOLO, ROME with all its failings, still 

preserved much of the vi- 
tality of the Renaissance, and the name of Michael Angelo 
alone is enough to bestow lustre upon the century in which 
he lived. 


FIG. 1I8S6—ANDREA SANSOVINO. TOMB 


THE RENAISSANCE 335 
2. The Transition 


The sculptor who embodied best the transition from one 
century to the other was Andrea Sansovino (1460-1529). 
The two monuments in which most unequivocally he led the 
way into the new manner are the almost identical tombs of 
Girolamo Basso della Rovere and Ascanio Maria Sforza 
(Fig. 186) in 8. Maria del Popolo, Rome, which, as direct 
imitations of the triumphal arch, established a precedent for 
sepulchres of the Cinquecento. The restlessness of the 
period, not content, in the effigy of the deceased, with the 
dignified repose of earlier days, wakes him to a half-reclining 
posture, derived from some ancient funereal relief, and 
crosses his legs. 


_ 3. Michael Angelo 


His hfe and works. The man who affected most profoundly 
the sculpture of the Cinquecento was the Florentine Michael 
Angelo Buonarroti (1475-1564), and his influence has con- 
tinued to be a vital factor in art down to our own day. 
Although he manifested supreme genius also.in poetry, paint- 
ing, and architecture, he was, by nature, essentially a sculp- 
tor, and he conceived and executed his painting from the 
sculptor’s standpoint. His career may be divided into five 
periods. Of the first period, which may be extended to the 
date of his employment by Julius II, 1505, the most important 
works are the Madonna of the Steps or Bridge in the Casa 
Buonarroti, Florence, the Bacchus and the tondo of the 
Madonna in the Bargello, the Pieta in St. Peter’s, Rome (Fig. 
187), and the David in the Academy, Florence. The second 
period (1505-1512) was chiefly occupied by the painting of 
the Sistine ceiling, but the so-called Tragedy of the Tomb of 
Julius II then began, and continued until the latter part of 
his life. During his third period, the pontificate of Leo X 
(1513-1521), the master devoted himself principally to the 
mausoleum of Julius. He had first conceived the super- 
human scheme of a separate temple in the midst of St. Peter’s, 
but Julius soon desisted from the enterprise and thus con- 


336 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


tributed to the embitterment of the artist’s life. Of several 
later and less pretentious plans that Michael Angelo was 
allowed to draw up, the most significant, of 1513 or 1519, 
comprises a three-sided structure against the wall, derived 
from the triumphal arch. Around the base were to be a series 
of bound and writhing captives, symbolizing perhaps the Neo- 


FIG. 187—-MICHAEL ANGELO. PIETA. §. PETER’S, ROME 


platonic concept of the imprisonment of man’s soul in an 
earthly body or the fettering of the arts by the death of Julius, 
but also referring, for the master himself, to the fate that 
ought to descend upon the foreigners, the barbar, who were 
then seeking to subjugate the peninsula. Others have ex- 
plained the symbolism of the Julius tomb as a crystallization 
of the words of a requiem mass. At the sides, in the second 


FIG. 188—-MICHAEL ANGELO. SLEEPING CAPTIVE. LOUVRE, PARIS. (PHOTO. 
ALINARI) 


338 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


stage, were to be seated Moses and St. Paul, typifying re- 
spectively the pope’s military and intellectual abilities, and 
Rachel and Leah, typifying respectively the contemplative 
and active aspects of his life. Many things conspired, how- 
ever, to thwart the realization of this plan, the scope of the 
monument was constantly reduced, and the work dragged on 
for thirty years more, until the tragedy, in its last sordid act, 
has produced in S. Pietro in Vincoli, Rome, a mere shadow of 
what Michael Angelo had intended. On the tomb as it now 
stands, the Moses and less certainly the inferior Rachel and 
Leah are by the master 
himself. Several other stat- 
ues originally meant for the 
monument are scattered in 
different places; most no- 
table_are-the-Sleeping (Fig. 
188) and the Heroic Cap- 
tive-of the Louvre. 

His fourth period was 
the pontificate of another 
Medicean pope, Clement 
VII (1523-1534), when the 
misfortunes of Italy, cul- 
minating in the sack of 
Rome and the extinction of 
Florentine freedom, found 
expression in the tombs of 
the Medici in the second 
FIG. 189—MICHAEL ANGELO. TOMB OF sacristy of S.. Lorenzo, 


Sete rae iN ie ee Florence. At the sides are 
(PHOTO. ALINARI) the two similar monuments 

of Giuliano, Duke of Ne- 
mours, and Lorenzo, Duke ot Urbino; at the back of the 
sacristy, the Madonna, one of Michael Angelo’s greatest 
achievements, and the Sts. Cosmas and Damian by his pupils 
were at first intended as parts of a mausoleum of Lorenzo 
the Magnificent, who, with his brother, the elder Giuliano, is 
now buried modestly under these figures. The new type of 
sepulchre represented by the two ducal tombs was to have 


THE RENAISSANCE 339 


a long history in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. 
The idealized portrait statue sits in an architectural facade; 
beneath is the sarcophagus surmounted by two reclining alle- 
gorical figures, for Giuliano, Day and Night, for Lorenzo, 
Dawn and Sunset (Fig. 189). The problem of their signifi- 
cance has given rise to many theories. Are they merely the 
four parts of the day, which, together, with the rivers of the 
earth, are invoked in a hymn by St. Ambrose for the feast 
of the titular saint, Lawrence? In any case, their gloom- 
sunken and agonized forms incarnate, more emphatically 
than ever before, the master’s three-fold depression at the 
political degeneration of Italy, at the corruption of religion, 
and at the disillusionment of his own life. The characteristic 
sculptural production of his fifth and last period (1534-1564) , 
when Christendom was ruled by the popes of the Catholic 
Reaction, is the Pieta, finished by Tiberio Calcagni, behind 
the high altar in the cathedral of Florence. The group has 
the fervid religious sentiment of the Counter-Reformation; 
and in contrast to the simplicity and freshness of his earlier 
rendering of the theme, the exhausted forms are bowed under 
the weight of grief, incorporating the old man’s settled melan- 
choly. 

His relation to the antique. Michael Angelo embodied the 
characteristics that are observed in the other sculpture of the 
period, but he transcended them. A passionate enthusiast 
for the antique, he caught ideas from classical statues more 
often than has been surmised, but he absorbed these borrow- 
ings and made them a part of his own highly original style. 
The David, for instance, is derived from the two Horse- 
tamers on the Quirinal, Rome. Compared to Verrocchio’s or 
even Donatello’s David, it is classic and generalized; but com- 
pared to the sculpture of his own day, it is individualized 
and already infused with the master’s tragic intensity. The 
early Pieta is perhaps the most marked example of the 
antique operating in Michael Angelo to smother emotional 
expression. Later, on the other hand, he was glad to find 
precedent for his contorted figures in the Laocoon (cf. Fig. 
79), which he often used for suggestions.. Though his love 
of the nude was partly inspired by antiquity, he did not ac- 


340 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


quire his anatomy from Hellenistic figures but from life, 
The supreme skill with which he used the nude as a vehicle 
of expression and the masterly manner in which he obtained 
his effects better with the undraped than with the draped 
form may be illustrated by the wonderful impression of laxity 
imparted by the body of Christ in the early Pieta and by 
the Sleeping Captive, which belongs to the same glorious 
race as the youths of the Sistine ceiling. 

The content of his works. He so imbued his productions 
with his high and peculiar sense of beauty and infused them 
with such profound thought or strong passion that he saved 
them from the prevalent danger of vacuity. This intellec- 
tual and emotional content usually emanated from his own ~ 
powerful individuality, for he coerced his figures into embodi- . 
ments of his religious, patriotic, and personal depression. 
Sometimes the tragedy_is consigned to the countenance, as 
in the David, the Lorenzo of the tomb, or the Dawn; but he is 
more likely, according to the tendency of his century, to seek 
expression through the body. The straining forms bespeak 
also the constant struggle within himself between his fervent 
Christianity and his pagan love of physical beauty. So 
it was that he gave meaning to the contortions of his figures. 
The Bacchus, as yet with little emotional significance, re- 
veals a preliminary stage of this phase of his style. In 
his maturity, by turning the head or one part of the form 
in a different direction from the rest of the form, he lent 
his authority to the posture which was to become a mania 
with the sixteenth century after him and which is described 
in Italian by the term contrapposto. By this convulsion of 
his figures, indeed, and by his high passion, he would have 
inaugurated the baroque style, had not the appearance of 
elegant mannerism in the second half of the Cinquecento post- 
poned its definite development to the beginning of the seven- 
teenth century. He did not, however, always confine himself 
to the expression of anguish; it was righteous wrath that he 
incarnated in the Moses, a statue which he has so infused with 
his own strong will and fierceness that it is one of the most 
terrifying pieces of sculpture in the world. This terribzlita, 
this Titanic force of his own nature, he transferred to a 


THE RENAISSANCE bral 


statue for the first time in the David. One sees here, also, 
how even at the beginning he thought in terms of the heroic, 
and one forgets, in the general, overpowering impression, to 
criticize such small details as the inordinate size of the right 
hand and, as not infrequently with Michael Angelo, of the 
head. Other early evidences of the epic character-of-_his mind 
are the Madonnas of the Bridge and of the Bargello; in the 
latter instance, the effect is already accentuated by broad 
and majestic sweeps of drapery. Posterity has wondered 
why Michael Angelo left so many of his works unfinished. 
Some have believed that such was his definite purpose and 
that he sought thereby to gain a mystical effect. His troubled 
career, however, accounts sufficiently for the abandonment of 
many of his commissions, once begun, and certain of his 
most celebrated creations are highly finished. Yet perhaps 
he was not always sorry to be forced to leave some of his 
works in an inchoate condition, since with his Neoplatonic 
proclivities he must have valued the impression of mysticism. 


4. The Colossal Tendency — 


In the rest of the sculptural output of Italy during the 
sixteenth century, two tendencies may be discerned: that 
which, preserving the outer shell but not the spiritual content 
of Michael Angelo, cultivated the massive and muscular, and 
usually chose the medium of marble; and that which retained” 
more of the old Florentine feeling for grace and delicacy, and 
naturally preferred bronze. The majority of masters pro- 
duced in both styles, but it is ordinarily possible to distinguish 
a more pronounced leaning in one direction or the other. The 
exponents of the former were likely to exaggerate it into a 
colossal vacuity, while the others debased grace into man- 
nered elegance. The worst representative of the colossal 
tendency was the Florentine, Baccio Bandinelli (1493-1560), 
whose style may be summed up in the adjective, ‘‘academic.”’ 
He was interested in the means rather than in the end; but 
his final condemnation is that he did not possess the technical 
skill on which he prided himself. The most notorious example 
of all his:vices is the group of Hercules and Cacus at a corner 


342 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


of the Palazzo Vecchio, Florence. In a famous passage of 
the Autobiography, Benvenuto Cellini flays its defects so un- 
mercifully that he leaves nothing further to be said. In the 
similar tombs of the Medici popes, Leo X and Clement VII, 
in & Maria sopra Minerva at Rome, executed with the 
collaboration of others, he carried still further the antiquarian 
tendency that Andrea Sansovino introduced into the sepul- 
chral type. Having-abandoned-altogether any reminiscence 
of early Florentine mausoleums, he reproduced exactly the 
triumphal arch, and abjured the luxuriance of the decorative 
repertoire of the Quattrocento, which Sansovino had retained. 
The most frankly academic works ‘of his career are the 
reliefs of Prophets and Apostles for the choir-screen of the 
cathedral of Florence, twenty-four of which have been re- 
moved to the Opera del Duomo. Considered as studies of 
various postures and various dispositions of the drapery, they 
are rather good, indeed so good that they are very generally 
thought to have been principally executed by his pupil, Gio- 
vanni Bandini, called Giovanni dell’Opera (1540-1599). 


5. The Tendency to Elegance 


Jacopo Sansovino. The first great representative of the 
other tendency was the Florentine, Jacopo Tatti (1486-1570), 
called Jacopo Sansovino from his master, Andrea. He has 
much grace, but he is likely to exaggerate it into affectation. 
He has much technical dexterity, but he is likely to bestow 
upon it the tone of a cold, academic perfection, relieved only 
by the sensuality ofthe epoch. The least mannered expres- 
sion that he was capable of giving to these qualities he at- 
tained in the masterpiece of his first period, the Bacchus of 
the Bargello (Fig. 190). After 1527 he definitely settled at 
Venice for the rest of his life. The sensuality of his art well 
fitted him to be the principal sculptural exponent of the 
paganish culture that was more gloriously embodied in paint 
by his friend, Titian. His most notable plastic achievement 
in this new environment was the embellishment of one facade 
of the Loggetta, which he had constructed around the base of 
the campanile, with four mythological bronze statues, em- 


THE RENAISSANCE 343 


blematic of the civic virtues of the Republic. Despite his 
technical skill and the beauty of his decorative motifs, his 
cult of the graceful instead of the real and his theatricality 
caused him to fail in dramatic scenes such as the episodes 
from the life of Christ on 
the bronze door of the 
sacristy of St. Mark’s. 
The tomb of the Doge 
Francesco Venier in 8. 
Salvatore, evolved upon 
the precedent of the tri- 
umphal arch, demon- 
strates that severe im- 
pressiveness was one of 
the compensations for the 
inordinate devotion to the 
antique. 

Cellin. The persistence 
of the old Florentine tra- 
dition of delicacy in Ben- 
venuto Cellini (1500- 
1571) is apparent in the 
fact that he began as a yg. 190—sacopo SANSOVINO. BACCHUS. 
goldsmith and in essence  BARGELLO, FLORENCE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 
always so remained. In 
small figures he could preserve the proportions and model 
delightfully, though affected by the bad taste of his day. 
He executed few large plastic works, and were it not 
for his persuasive boastfulness and for the charm with 
which he invests them by his descriptions in the Auto- 
biography, as a monumental sculptor he would be compara- 
tively unimportant. The salt-cellar of Francis I, now in the 
Imperial Treasury, Vienna, and the only absolutely authentic 
relic of his activity as a goldsmith, is an epitome of his style. 
First, it is highly ornate. Second, it prefers the nude human 
figure as a decorative motif. Third, the triumphal arch and 
the frigidity of the figures embody the increased enthusiasm 
for the antique. Of several pieces of sculpture which he 
states that he made in France, only one is extant, the bronze 


344 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


recumbent Nymph now in the Louvre. As usual in Ben- 
venuto’s larger figures, there are anatomical defects, such as 
the attenuation of the nude, the masculine chest, to which 
breasts have been attached, and the awkward bend of the 
body. The breasts themselves, the abdomen, the arms, and 
the hands, however, exhibit the goldsmith’s dexterity in de- 
tails. The skilful and charming animals continue the tradi- 


FIG. 191—CELLINI. DELIVERANCE OF ANDROMEDA. BARGELLO, FLORENCE. 
(PHOTO. ALINARI) é 


tion of Ghiberti and the great bronze-workers of the pre- 
vious century. His most celebrated statue is the Perseus, 
begun in 1545 on his return to Florence from France, the 
interest in which is piqued by his account of its no less than 
miraculous casting. In the first rough little sketch of wax 
in the Bargello, by a supreme effort of genius he succeeded 
in returning to the forceful simplicity of the Quattrocento. In 
the finished statue in the Loggia dei Lanzi, Florence, he 
abandoned his first ideas and created one of the popular 


THE RENAISSANCE 345 


Herculean forms, frittering away his energy upon a study 
of muscles. The pratuettas on the base, especially the Danaé, 
are again far superior. The relief of Andromeda’s deliver- 
ance, now transported from the base to the Bargello (Fig. 
191), is full of every kind of tour de force, indicative of the 
technical ostentation that marks the age and especially Ben- 
venuto. He was not a great portraitist. Of his two authentic 
bronze busts, that of Cosimo I in the Bargello illustrates pain- 
fully the loss of the individuality that almost seems to speak 
in a bust of the Quattrocento. The portrait of Bindo Altoviti, 
at Fenway—Gourt,; Boston, is less theatrical. 

Giovanna Bologna. The last great sculptor of the Italian 
Renaissance proper was Giovanni Bologna (c. 1524-1608), 
one of several distinguished Flemish masters who became 
naturalized Italians at the end of the sixteenth and in the 
seventeenth centuries. He combined both the colossal and 
graceful phenomena, but inclined to the latter. Like all 
others he was influenced by Michael Angelo. As a com- 
panion piece to Buonarroti’s so-called Victory in the Bargello, 
for instance, he did the Florence overcoming Siena (also 
named Virtue overcoming Vice) in the same Museum, exag- 
gerating the writhings and failing to imbue them with 
meaning. When he attempted colossal figures, he bestowed 
upon them a factitious elegance which is incongruous 
with the huge stature and creates the same unfortunate im- 
pression as when we see in real life effeminacy united to a 
large body. He possessed a high degree of technical dexterity, 
most brilliantly illustrated by his best known work, the 
bronze of the flying Mercury in the Bargello. The sixteenth 
century was an age of fountains, several of which were de- 
signed by the Florentine sculptor and landscape architect, 
Niccolo Tribolo (1485-1550) ; and Giovanni Bologna labored 
upon a number of notable specimens. ‘Two belong to his 
colossal manner, one of Neptune in the central square of 
Bologna, and ihe other of Oceanus? on the Isolotto of the 
Boboli Garden, Florence (Fig. 192). The Venus of a fountain 


*On the actual fountain a copy of the central figure of Oceanus 
has been substituted for the original, which has been removed to the 
Bargello. 


346 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


in the Grotto Buontalenti of this garden and a similar 
Venus over a fountain in the gardens of the Villa della Petraia 
belong to his other style in which, with exquisite grace but 
with some affectation, he maintained, like Cellini, the old 
Florentine tradition. His 
most avowedly academic 
production is the Rape of 
the Sabine Woman (Fig. 
193), which exerted a tre- 
mendous influence upon 
the sculpture of the late 
Renaissance and the ba- 
roque. Viewed as merely 
academic, it is one of the 
greatest feats of all sculp- 
ture. It is planned to give 
three kinds of nudes, the 
feminine, the youthful 
masculine, and the more 
mature masculine, in as 
widely varied contortions 
ee 3 as possible, and it may be 
ri, 1B—clOWANNY BOLOGNA. | FOUN” inspected. from. any’ point 
FLORENCE. (PHOTO, ALINARI) with equal effectiveness. 

Many of his sacred pro- 
auerane reveal an unexpectedly sincere religious sense, only 
slightly affected by mawkish sentiment and ae ele- 
gance. The best examples are the bronze reliefs from the 
Passion now in the University of Genoa, the actual execution 
of which he perhaps consigned to his pupil Pierre Franque- 
ville. Like Raphael he here caught and crystallized a happy, 
evanescent moment when the antique and modern civiliza- 
tions almost blended, and he followed Raphael also in some- 
times employing impressive architectural backgrounds to 
increase the solemnity of the scenes. As a portraitist he was 
unable to lend character to his subjects. Typical is the eques- 
trian Cosimo I in the Piazza della Signoria, Florence, the 
steed of which set the precedent for the stocky-horses-ofthe 
baroque. 4 


THE RENAISSANCE 347 


Tacca. Pietro Tacca (1577?-1640?), a pupil of Giovanni 
Bologna, in his equestrian Philip IV of the Plaza de Oriente 
at Madrid, with an incipient outburst of baroque ardor, 
created what is perhaps the first work of this sort in which 
the horse rears upon his hind legs. The idea may have come 
from some engraving or lingering tradition of Leonardo da 


FIG. 193—-GIOVANNI BOLOGNA. RAPE OF THE SABINE WOMAN. LOGGIA DEI 
LANZI, FLORENCE. (PHOTO. ALINARI) 


Vinci’s destroyed equestrian figure of Francesco Sforza at 
Milan, or from a painting by Rubens; but it is said that the 
attitude is derived also from the fashion of the Spanish 
riding-school. Among several other productions, his four 
chained Slaves around the base of Giovanni dell’ Opera’s 
statue of Ferdinand I at Leghorn are the most significant. 
He might once more have found the conception already in 


348 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


some of Leonardo’s drawings for equestrian monuments, but 
he probably took it from Giovanni Bologna’s scheme for a 
monument to Henry IV at Paris. The figures are treated 
with a powerful naturalism, which again shows that Tacca 
had lived on into the days of the baroque. 


BE. THE RENAISSANCE OUTSIDE OF ITALY 


The Renaissance did not penetrate from Italy into the 
rest of Europe until about the beginning of the sixteenth 
century, and then, at first, only in architectural detail. For 
the figures and often even for the ornament, the Gothic style 
persisted during the early years of the century, and, in places, 
beside the new Italian manner, well on into the century. It 
was the Italian style of the Cinquecento rather than that of 
the Quattrocento which was adopted. 


1. France 


Introduction. Although many Italians had already been 
honored with patronage in France, it was not until the reign 
of Francis I (1515-1547) that the Renaissance was actually 
negrafted and-produced French sculpture of the new fashion. 
The colony of Italian artists was much augmented. Fran- 
cesco Primaticcio_of Bologna (c. 1504-1570), who belonged 
to the Raphaelesque tradition, became the general director 
of Francis I’s artistic enterprises, especially in the decora- 
tion of the palace at. Fontainebleau. An important event 
for the history of French sculpture was Primaticcio’s journey 
to Italy in 1542 to get bronze replicas of the famous ancient 
statues that had recently been excavated. These antiques 
and the Italian sculpture that was being produced at Fon- 
tainebleau made the palace a school in which many French 
masters were trained. The tomb of Louis XII and Anne of 
Brittany in St. Denis established at this time a precedent 
for royal sepulchres in the French Renaissance. The sar- 
cophagus with the cadavers rests upon a base carved with 
reliefs of the sovereign’s deeds in Italy and surmounted by 
a rectangular canopy of the Renaissance. Above the canopy 


THE RENAISSANCE 349 


kneel the two effigies; at the four corners of the base sit 
the Virtues and under each of the arches one of the twelve 
Apostles. The two portraits and perhaps the cadavers were 
done by the school of Michel Colombe; the rest is largely 
the production of a family of Florentine sculptors established 
at Tours, whose name Giusto was there Gallicized into Juste. 
Outside of this series of royal sepulchres, by the end of the 
century the old medieval tomb with the effigy upon a de- 
tached, elevated base had been abandoned for an edifice 
against the wall, partially suggested by Italian examples 
but with the important difference of the kneeling attitude 
for the deceased. The French sculpture of the Renaissance 
was distinguished from the production of Italy by an occa- 
sional reassertion of the medieval sensitiveness to architec- 
tural function and by the delight in femininity that from 
first to last has impressed itself upon every aspect of French 
civilization. It was also saved from falling into such utter 
coldness as we often find in Italy of the Cinquecento by a 
certain persistence of the old Gallic naturalism of the Gothic 
period. 

Goujon. There is less of Gothic naturalism and more 
of Italianism in the most celebrated French sculptor of the 
sixteenth century, Jean Goujon (probably a Norman, d. 
before 1568), and yet his achievement is by no means so 
frigid as the contemporary Italian output. All his important 
work was done for the decoration of architectural monuments. 
He elongated his forms for monumental effect, and he was 
always as ready to sacrifice correct anatomy to the exigencies 
of an architectural design as to his love of undulating outlines. 
A true Frenchman, he expressed himself most characteris- 
tically in sinuous feminine forms emerging from sinuous 
drapery. His masculine forms, likewise, tend towards a 
studied grace, but they also adopt, to a certain degree, the 
prevalent cult of the colossal, which French naturalism saved 
from vacuity. His drapery is Neo-Attic in its great swirls 
and in the minuteness of its pleats. It is particularly in this 
drapery that his peculiarly French nicety of execution mani- 
fests itself. His ideal of the feminine figure is approximated 
in the allegorical forms above the outside and inside of the 


FIG. 194—GoUJON. NYMPHS ON FOUNTAIN, SQUARE OF THE INNOCENTS, 
PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 


350 


THE RENAISSANCE 301 


main portal to the edifice at Paris now known as the Hotel 
Carnavalet. He achieved this ideal in his masterpiece, the 
Fountain of the Nymphs, now in the Square of the Innocents, 
Paris. At the remodelling towards the end of the eighteenth 
century, it was made into a four-sided structure, and three 
Nymphs were added to Goujon’s original five; the plastic 
accretion was done by Pajou, who succeeded wonderfully in 
reproducing his predecessor’s manner. Three reliefs of marine 
deities and monsters that Goujon had introduced on the base 
were removed in 1812 and are now in the Louvre. It is 
high enough praise to state that the Nymphs (Fig. 194) may 
be compared with the Victories of the balustrade for the 
temple of Athena Nike (cf. Fig. 58). Not since Greek days 
had any sculptor realized so well that happy mean between 
voluptuousness and noble restraint in the treatment of the 
feminine form. The culmination of Goujon’s career, from 
the standpoint of renown, was his employment on the Louvre. 
About 1550 he executed three pairs of allegorical women to 
frame the round windows above the doors on Pierre Lescot’s 
facade. The style is that of the Nymphs, impaired by the 
greater classical dryness that marks his last period. His 
most surprising achievement is within the palace, the four 
caryatides supporting a balcony in the antechamber oi 
Catherine dei Medici, in the execution of which he perhaps 
followed freely models provided by some other artist. He 
could not have known the examples of the Erechtheum (cf. 
Fig. 57), but by brilliant intuition he reflected their glory 
in the monumental nobility of his impassive forms and in an 
architectural restraint of drapery, which is contrasted with 
the license that he ordinarily permitted himself in this phase 
of his art. 

Pilon. The other great court-sculptor of the French six- 
teenth century, the Parisian Germain Pilon (1535-1590), 
although influenced by Goujon, was more closely related to 
the old Gothic tradition. In the monument for the heart of 
Henry II, possibly designed by Primaticcio and now to be 
seen in the Louvre, the three lithe Virtues made by Pilon to 
support the urn are more naturalistic translations of Goujon’s 
feminine ideal. On the mausoleum of Henry II in St. Denis, 


Ste A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


planned by Primaticcio, the bronze Virtues at the corners 
were probably the work of the Italian master, but the kneel- 
ing bronze portraits and the marble cadavers of the king and 
queen were executed by Pilon, the two former figures in his 
best naturalistic vein. As he grew older, he .emancipated_ 
himself further from the mannerisms of the-late Renaissance 
and cultivated a more uncompromising realism, often retain- 


Bo BYOE BUG SLA ESS CI PEN 


Ps GERMAIN PILAEN. _ 


FIG. 195—PILON. SEPULCHRAL EFFIGY OF RENE DE BIRAGUE. LOUVRE, 
PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 


ing medieval polychromy. The St. Francis, now in the 
church of St. Jean-St. Francois, Paris, is Spanish in its 
naturalistic presentation of religious ecstasy. His classical 
training, however, helped him to maintain a proper repose 
and monumentality in his busts and sepulchral effigies. His 
greatest triumph of vigorous and penetrating portraiture is 
the kneeling bronze of the Chancellor de Birague in the 
Louvre (Fig. 195). 

Provincial sculpture. Throughout the sixteenth century 


THE RENAISSANCE 353 


the provinces were centres of considerable activity in re- 
ligious sculpture. The old subjects and compositions, such as 
the retables and the Holy Sepulchres, were still repeated 
again and again, but the figures themselves were gradually 
Italianized. Agitated postures became more general; the 
gestures affected a mannered elegance; the drapery fluttered 
hither and thither; the countenances lost their individualiza- 


FIG. 196—LIGIER RICHIER. HOLY SEPULCHRE. ST. ETIENNE, ST. MIHIEL. 
(PHOTO. BULLOZ) 


tion and adopted the cold and generalized idealism of the 
Renaissance. The greatest of these provincial masters was 
Ligier Richier of Lorraine (c. 1500-1567). For the sacred 
personages he frequently employed contemporary costumes, 
and he still revealed not only the lovely feeling of the détente, 
but also, in a pronounced form, the notes of pathos and pas- 
‘sion that mark so much late Gothic art. In the upright 
cadaver of René de Chélons in St. Pierre at Bar-le-Duc, he 


354 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


gave to the common medieval motif one of its most repellent 
expressions, but even this skeleton covered with putrefying 
flesh he ennobled in a certain way by the exaltation of the 
gesture with which the deceased offers his heart to God. His 
style in less eccentric sepulchral memorials may be illus- 
trated by the figure of the aged nun, Philippe de Gueldres, 
in the Franciscan church, Nancy, which is treated with a 
vigorous but kindly realism. His religious masterpiece is 
the Holy Sepulchre in St. Etienne at St. Mihiel (Fig. 196). 


2. The Low Countries 


Introductory. As in the flamboyant period the Flemish 
had treated Gothic forms with the greatest opulence, license, 
and fantasy, so now they overloaded their architecture and 
pieces of ecclesiastical furniture with the Italian forms, some- 
times giving the human body capricious proportions, delight- 
ing in agitation, and in moulding the ornamental detail into 
whimsical and grotesque shapes. Sculpture was conceived to 
have a decorative rather than an intrinsic value, so that no 
such great masters of form as in Italy and France were called 
into existence. The production of Holland was not essentially 
distinguished from that of Belgium, except that it was less 
copious and brilliant; the principal centres were Breda, Dord- 
recht, and Utrecht. In the latter part of the century a 
highly Italianized form of Flemish sculpture dominated a 
large part of Europe in the persons of Giovanni Bologna and 
his pupils, who had emigrated from Belgium and Holland; 
but curiously enough, neither these masters nor their man- 
nered style found any favor in the Low Countries themselves. 

Disseminators of Itahanism. The most Italianate pur- 
veyor of the Renaissance in sculpture, through study at Rome, 
was Jacques du Broeucq (between 1500 and 1510-1584). He 
never acquired the accuracy of modelling possessed by the 
Italians, he usually made elongated bodies that have no back 
bones, and he is full of the restlessness that marks the art 
of his country. His capital production was the choir-screen 
of Ste. Waudru, Mons, the majority of the fragments from. 
which may still be seen in the church. His tomb of Eustache 


THE RENAISSANCE 350 


de Croy in Notre Dame at St. Omer, in its original disposi- 
tion, constituted a sepulchral type which, with an allegorical 
statue at one end of the cadaver upon a bier, and a statue 
or statues at the other end, became popular in the Flemish 
baroque. Jean Mone (active during the first half of sixteenth 
century), if he is really to be credited with the works that 


FIG. 197—CORNELIS FLORIS DE VRIENDT. SECTION OF CHOIR-SCREEN, CATHE- 
DRAL, TOURNAI. (PHOTO. PHONO-PHOTO, TOURNAI) 


have now been attributed to him, performed an equally or 
even more significant. role in the propagation of the new 
fashions. Until recently he has been known only as the 
author of the Italianate retable in the church of Notre Dame 
at Hal. The painter and general artistic impresario, Lan- 
celot Blondeel (1496-1561), also helped to Italianize sculpture 
by his designs for plastic monuments. One of the exponents 
of the more indigenous adaptation of the Renaissance and one 


356 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


of the first Belgians-to spread this style in other parts of 
Europe was the architect and sculptor, Cornelis Floris de 
Vriendt.(1514-1575). In ornament he developed especially 
the Flemish grotesques and arabesques. His tabernacle in 
the church of St..Léonard, Léau, is an absolute translation 
into Italian of similar medieval structures, with human 
figures used as supports in a fashion that was much affected 
in several kinds of monuments during this epoch in Flanders. 
In other works, as in the choir-screen of the cathedral of 
Tournai (Fig. 197), he is more Italianate. It was chiefly 
by his tombs in Denmark 
and Germany that he dis- 
seminated the fashions of 
his native land. 
Characteristic monu- 
ments. The sepulchres of 
the sixteenth century, such 
as that of the Count An- 
toine de Lalaing in the 
church of St. Catherine, 
Hoogstraeten, possibly the 
work of Jean Mone, often 
continued the medieval 
type with high base and 
with honestly realistic eff- 
gies. Other examples, such 
as the tomb of Jan III de 
Mérode in the church 
of St. Dympna, Gheel, 
ascribed to Floris, consist 
of a table supported by the 
FIG. 198—FIREPLACE. HOTEL DE VILLE, popular human figures. 
ANTWERP. (PHOTO. THILL) Epitaphs, in the typical 
florid manner of the Flem- 
ish Renaissance, persisted as a frequent mode of commemora- 
tion. A series of pretentious fireplaces constitute one of the 
peculiarly Flemish contributions to the-history of art. The 
example in the Burgomaster’s Room of the Hotel de Ville, 
Antwerp, perhaps by the painter Peeter Coecke (1502-1550) , 


THE RENAISSANCE 307 


combines Italianism with Flemish decorative elaboration 
(Fig. 198). The fireplace in the Stadhuis of Kampen, Hol- 
land, by Jacob Colyns de Nole of Cambrai (c. 1520-1601) is 
more classical. The most magnificent example, in the Council 
Chamber of the Palais de Justice, Bruges, was executed by 
Guyot de Beaugrant and others on the designs of Blondeel. 
Of carved wooden choir-stalls, for which the Low Countries 
had always been famous, the Renaissance produced several 
fine series. The most notable, in a severer taste than was 
common in Belgium or Holland, are those in the Groote Kerk 
at Dordrecht. 


3. Germany and Related Countries 


Introductory. The plastic style of northern Italy, and 
especially Venice, exerted the preponderant influence in the 
formation of the first stage of the German Renaissance, and 
the sculptors were also very much indebted to Diirer and 
other contemporary German painters and engravers. Very 
little important monumental sculpture was produced at this 
time in the style of the Renaissance, but the German masters 
excelled in small objects, such as statuettes and mythologi- 
cal plaques. An early focus of the new movement was 
Nuremberg, where for a considerable time it existed beside 
the medieval manner of such men as Krafft and Stoss. When 
the Renaissance had definitely triumphed in the middle of 
the century, German sculpture, chiefly because of the re- 
ligious wars, had fallen into decadence, and almost all sig- 
nificant production was in the hands of masters from the 
Low Countries. 


The First Half of the Sixteenth Century 


Vischer. Peter Vischer of Nuremberg (1460-1529), who 
presided over a workshop that excelled in the medium of 
bronze, died before Stoss and was himself half Gothic. The 
tomb of the Archbishop Ernst in the cathedral of Magdeburg 
(1496) could be reckoned still completely Gothic, were it 
not for the statuettes of Apostles around the base, which re- 
veal in the heads an effort for a more ideal beauty and in 


358 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the drapery a predilection for more broadly flowing lines. 
In the Stadt-Kirche at Roémhild, the lovely tomb of Count 
Hermann of Henneburg (about 1508) exhibits in the effigies 
a greater classicism. It is always possible, however, that, 
in this earlier stage of Vischer’s career, these qualities were 


FIG. 199—PETER VISCHER. RELIQUARY OF ST. SEBALDUS. ST. SEBALDUS, 
NUREMBERG. (FROM DEHIO AND VON BEZOLD, “DIE DENKMALER DER DEUT- 
SCHEN BILDHAUERKUNST”’) 


due, not wholly to Italy, but partially to the tendency 
towards a détente that was most pronounced in the Gothic 
school of Swabia. The indebtedness: to the Renaissance 
is unmistakable in Vischer’s masterpiece, the bronze canopy 
(1507-1519) covering the old reliquary of St. Sebaldus 
in his titular church at Nuremberg (Fig. 199); and yet its 


) 


THE RENAISSANCE 309 


fanciful opulence and certain other indigenous traits trans- 
mit an impression that is distinctly Teutonic. Every avail- 
able part is covered with a fusion of medieval and Renais- 
sance decoration, especially putti, which make up for what 
they lack of Italian correctness by a certain Teutonic lusti- 
ness and sportiveness. To the Apostles on the piers of the 
canopy Vischer, though starting always with German types, 
has given beautifully idealized heads and elegant bodies, the 
lines of which are revealed by the classical folds of the 
drapery. In the chateau of Montrottier, France, there have 
recently been discovered fragments of the screen ordered from 
him for the Fugger Chapel, Augsburg, eventually set up in 
the Rathaus, Nuremberg, and finally dismantled; the two 
bronze reliefs by the master himself demonstrate that at last 
he succumbed completely to the Renaissance. It is customary 
to attribute to Vischer the bronze statues of Arthur and 
Theodoric among the twenty-eight ancestors that surround 
the tomb of the Emperor Maximilian in the Franciscan 
church at Innsbruck. The several German masters who were 
responsible for the other ancestors made them look like the 
manikins that exhibit heavy suits of armor in museums, but 
the sculptor of the Arthur allows us to divine the body be- 
neath the accoutrement. Here and in some of Vischer’s cer- 
tain works, the enduring qualities of the best German art 
reassert themselves even in the surroundings of the Renais- 
sance—firmness of pose, forceful realism, and restrained 
vigor. The reliefs, Virtues, and kneeling effigy of the tomb 
were finally executed by the Flemish sculptor, Alexander 
Colin of Malines (1527 or 1529-1612), who enjoyed extensive 
patronage in Germany and Austria. 

Peter Vischer the Younger. Of several of Vischer’s sons 
who followed the paternal profession, the most distinguished 
was Peter the Younger (1487-1528), whom some critics be- 
lieve to have been responsible even for the more progressive 
elements in the productions ascribed to his father. The- 
principal work that he himself executed without his father’s 
collaboration is the fine-upright sepulchral—bronze of the 
Elector Frederick the Wise in the manorial chapel at Witten- 
berg. The architectural ordinance seems to be imitated from 


360 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the section of the Venetian tomb of Niccold Tron containing 
the erect effigy of the deceased. The impressive portrait has 
something of the sternness and testiness of the Reformation. 
The Vischer workshop, however, gradually lost its popularity 
and confined itself more and more to objects of virtu. A 
typical specimen is the younger Peter’s bronze tablet of 
Orpheus and Eurydice, illustrating an original adaptation 
of the antique and existing in four repetitions. 

Flotner. Another significant master of Nuremberg, who 
may even have influenced the elder Vischer, was Peter Flotner 
(c. 1485-1546), perhaps a Swiss by birth. Modern 1esearch 
has been endeavoring to make of him one of the pioneers in 
the German Renaissance by attributing to him designs for 
certain important German and Swiss monuments. Though 
chiefly an architect, he was a jack of all artistic trades. His 
plastic style was that of an Italian mannerist. His small 
plaques of sacred, mythological, or allegorical subjects were 
executed in stone, but copies were made in lead and bronze. 
The five bronze specimens, with episodes from the Old and 
New Testaments, in the Metropolitan Museum, contain the 
pictorial backgrounds that he often affected. 

Adolf and Hans Dauher. It is a question whether we 
should follow certain critics in ascribing to Flétner or some 
other artist the elements of the Renaissance, such as the 
design, ornament, and putti, on the choir-stalls of the Fugger 
chapel in St. Anna, Augsburg, and the similar embellishment 
of the high altar of the church at Annaberg. As a conse- 
quence of such an ascription we should have to deny to 
Adolf Dauher of Ulm (c. 1460-1523 or 1524) the significant 
role in the importation of Italianism that has often been 
allotted to him. The stalls are preserved only in drawings 
and an etching, except for some fragments and sixteen busts 
of sacred personages and Sibyls, fifteen in the Kaiser Fried- 
rich Museum, Berlin, and one in the Figdor Collection, 
Vienna. The majority, if not all, of these busts, in distinc- 
tion from the decorative detail of the stalls, were certainly 
executed by Adolf Dauher. It is perhaps possible to trace 
in the busts and in his figures on the altar at Annaberg some 
Italian elegance, but they are essentially specimens of the — 


THE RENAISSANCE 361 


late German Gothic style, plainly influenced by the figures 
on Syrlin’s stalls at Ulm. Adolf’s son, Hans-Dauher (c. 1485- 
1538), whom, as in the case of the Vischers, some have 
thought the innovating spirit in the workshop, is chiefly re- 
membered for his epitaphs and slate plaques. In his back- 
grounds, which are often suggested by the architecture of the 
Lombard Renaissance or of Venetian tombs, he is fond of the 
triumphal arch; the figures, except the puttz, and the drap- 


FIG. 200—HANS DAUHER. TRIUMPH OF CHARLES V. METROPOLITAN 
MUSEUM, NEW YORK. (COURTESY OF THE METROPOLITAN MUSEUM) 


eries are still largely Gothic... He is distinguished by a power 
of vivid characterization and by much stylistic gusto; one 
of his most agreeable qualities is an extreme delicacy of exe- 
cution that reverts to low relief and recalls the Florentine 
Quattrocento. According to the German habit of the time, 
he probably often translated into his medium the composi- 
tions of others. The largest and most populous of his reliefs 
is the panel in the Metropolitan Museum representing the 
triumph of Charles V (Fig. 200). 

Meit. Konrad Meit of Worms (active at the end of the 


362 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


fifteenth and beginning of the sixteenth century) was en- 
dowed with more personality than the majority of his con- 
temporaries, so that he was able to impress upon all his 
creations the appealing charm-of his own highly developed 
sense of beauty. Although he was affected by the new move- 
ment, especially in his predilection for the nude and for puttz, 
he retained so much Gothic naturalism that his style seems 
like that of an Italian master of the Quattrocento rather than 
of the Cinquecento. The signed work upon which all the 
other attributions are based, an alabaster statuette of 
Judith in the National Museum, Munich, is a typical ex- 
ample of his naturalistic nudes. Of a number of busts in 
wood or alabaster ascribed to him, the two finest, quite the 
equals of the best that the Italian Quattrocento achieved, are 
similar portraits of young men, one in the Kaiser Friedrich 
Museum at Berlin and the other in the British Museum. 
Documentary. evidence proves that he was extensively em- 
ployed upon the magnificent tombs of Margaret of Austria, 
Philibert ‘of Savoy, and the latter’s mother, Margaret of 
Bourbon, in the church of Brou at Bourg in southern France; 
but it is difficult to separate his production from that of the 
crowd of his Flemish, French, and Italan collaborators. 
Among the parts assigned to him, the three beautiful effigies 
are-half portraits, half-idealizations, after the manner of the 
détente; and the pair of captivating putt? at the feet of 
Margaret of Austria may again be compared with the most 
famous specimens of fifteenth century Italy. 


The Second Half of the Sixteenth Century 


During the second half of the century Belgian and Dutch 
sculptors monopolized important patronage, introducing the 
mannered style of Giovanni Bologna, frequently in the form 
that it had assumed at Venice. Their significant productions, 
often consisting of fountains that imitate the Italian speci- 
mens of the later Cinquecento, are found in southern Ger- 
many, especially at Augsburg and Munich. The dominant 
plastic personality in the latter city was Hubert. Gerhard 
(c. 1545-1620), who impregnated his Italianate manner with 


THE RENAISSANCE 363 


a certain Dutch heaviness. His most celebrated achievement 
is the fountain of Augustus before the Rathaus at Augsburg 
(Fig. 201). Besides his certain works several familiar land- 
marks of Munich, such as 
the Wittelsbach Fountain 
of the Alte Residenz and 
the Madonna on the Col- 
umn in the Marien-Platz, 
are beginning to be ascribed 
with some reason and 
unanimity to his design and 
partial execution. The 
name of the German sculp- 
tor, Hans Krumper, has 
also been mentioned in 
connection with these mon- 
uments, but he may have 
been only an assistant of 
Gerhard or no more than a 
caster of bronze. In any 
ee = pone FIG. 201—GERHARD. FOUNTAIN OF AU- 
criticism “s abandoning the GUSTUS. AUGSBURG. (PHOTO. DR. FR 
tradition which exalted the — srorprner, BERLIN) 

Belgian painter, Pietro 

Candido (an Italianization of Peeter de Witte), into the de- 
signer of the plastic groups at present attributed to Ger- 
hard and indeed of those that he surely executed. The most 
faithful disseminator of Giovanni Bologna’s manner in Ger- 
many was Adriaen de Vries of The Hague (c. 1560-1627) , 
who had a somewhat greater proclivity than his master for 
the muscular and contorted. Of his many extant works, 
which are all of bronze, the best known are the simpler foun- 
tain of the flying Mercury and the more elaborate fountain 
of Hercules and the Hydra, both at Augsburg. 


4. England 


The sculptural output.of the Renaissance in Britain, partly 
by reason of the iconoclasm of the Reformation, was a very 
poor thing indeed. The Gothic style, in an enervated form, 


364 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


dragged out a lingering death through the whole sixteenth 
century. A few Italians, none of them possessing the highest 
talent, found employment in London and the surrounding 
district; but England was blessed with no such native ge- 
niuses as Germain Pilon or Peter Vischer. The principal ex- 
tant Italian works were done by Pietro Torrigiano of 
Florence (1472-1528). Having found his way to England 
in 1512, he left as his two greatest achievements in this 
country the tombs of Henry VII and of that sovereign’s 
mother, Margaret, Countess of Richmond, both in Henry 
VII’s chapel in Westminster Abbey. In the midst of decora- 
tive figures and architectural detail of the Renaissance, 
something of the English Gothic tradition still remains, espe- 
cially in the sepulchral type with high base and in the style 
of the effigies themselves. By the second quarter of the 
century, exponents of Italianism from the Low Countries 
began to be the recipients of that favor which they were to 
enjoy for the next two hundred years in the island, and a 
number of mediocre Englishmen abandoned the Gothic to 
imitate either their achievements or more purely Italian 
work. ‘The indigenous carvers confined themselves to the 
architectural repertoire of Italianism, and used the figure only 
in such details as ornamental heads or, particularly, profiled 
faces, which are almost caricatured portraits and constitute 
a peculiarity of the English Renaissance. The choir-stalls, 
for instance those of King’s College, Cambridge, are perhaps 
the most noteworthy examples of this movement. From the 
death of Edward VI in 1553 to the accession of James I in 
1603, the degeneration of sculpture was betrayed by its al- 
most absolute restriction to uninteresting tombs, the effigies 
of which were debased descendants of their Gothic ancestors. 


5. Spain 


Italian disseminators of the Renaissance. Domenico 
Fancelli of Settignano (1469-1519) established a precedent 
for certain tombs of the early Renaissance in Spain. A good 
sepulchral portraitist, he has, in architectural detail, a 
breath of Desiderio da Settignano’s elegance, but for his — 


THE RENAISSANCE 365 


forms he has already partially developed the amplitude of the 
Cinquecento. His impressive monument of Prince John, the 
son of Ferdinand and Isabella, in Sto. Tomas, Avila, is a 
marble transcription of Pollaiuolo’s tomb _for Sixtus IV; his 
later monument of the sovereigns themselves in the Royal 
Chapel adjoining the cathedral of Granada is merely an 
elaboration in a more mannered style. His earliest mau- 
soleum in Spain, for the Archbishop Mendoza in the cathedral 
of Seville (1509), is of a different type, derived from the 


FIG. 202—JUAN DE ARFE AND LESMES FERNANDEZ DEL MORAL. SEPULCHRAL 
EFFIGY OF CRISTOBAL DE ROJAS. S. PEDRO, LERMA. (PHOTO. LACOSTE) 


Roman wall-tombs of the later Quattrocento. Pietro Tor- 
rigiano brought his checkered life to an end by coming 
to Seville in 1526 and by finally starving to death in the 
Inquisition’s prison. In his terracotta statues in the Museum 
of that city, a seated Virgin and a kneeling St. Jerome, like 
many another foreigner he was so overcome by the artistic 
atmosphere of the peninsula that he indulged in a.pronounced 
Spanish naturalism. Under Charles V and Philip II, two 
great Italian bronze-workers, Leone Leoni (1509-1590) and 


366 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


his son Pompeo (d. 1610), executed a number of monumental 
achievements. The masterpieces of the latter are the kneeling 
bronzes of Charles V and Philip II with their families on 
either side of the sanctuary in the Escorial. In a style similar 
to that of these figures, he also designed two sepulchral por- 
traits of the Duke and Duchess of Lerma, now in the Museum 
of Valladolid; but they were actually executed by his assist- 
ant, Juan de Arfe (1535-1603), belonging to a family of 
Flemish or German goldsmiths who had emigrated to Spain 
at the beginning of the century, and they were finished by 
Arfe’s son-in-law, Lesmes Fernandez del Moral. Of the two 
statues of the Duke’s uncles, intended to accompany those of 
the Duke and Duchess, only one was executed, that of Cris- 
tébal de Rojas, now in 8. Pedro, at Lerma (Fig. 202). Begun _ 
by Juan_de-Arfe and completed by his son-in-law, in aristo- 
cratic richness of accoutrement, in fineness of technique, and 
in tranquil beauty it is one of the most remarkable mortuary 
bronzes of the world. Pompeo Leoni also did marble tombs 
of this fashionable type, with kneeling effigies looking towards 
the altar from under an arch. 

The transitianal masters. Of the transitional masters who 
still retained much of the Gothic style and, like even the later 
sculptors of the Spanish Renaissance, clung to the tradition 
of polychromy, two may be taken as characteristic. The 
Burgundian Felipe Vigarni (d. 1543) had acquired the 
Franco-Flemish manner of the late Middle Ages on his native 
heath.=°The large reliefs from the Passion on the screen 
behind the high altar of the cathedral of Burgos stand for 
his early Spanish style, in which he amalgamated with his 
Gothic training such Italianisms as elegance of attitude, in- 
terest in the nude, and greater tranquillity. His retable 
and kneeling statues of Ferdinand and Isabella in the Royal 
Chapel at Granada betray how his later, more definite en- 
rolment in the new movement emptied his figures of Gothic 
life and left them cold. In the eastern part of the peninsula, 
Damian Forment (c. 1480-c. 1541), chiefly a sculptor of 
retables, passed through much the same evolution. His more 
Gothic phase may be illustrated by the retable of the church 
of the Pilar at Saragossa, patterned directly upon the 


THE RENAISSANCE 367 


medieval example in the Seo of the same city. The frame- 
work and the greater part of the architectural detail are 
florid Gothic; but the predella and base exhibit ornamental 
elements of the Lombard Renaissance, and the figures them- 
selves already have the fullness of the Italian sixteenth cen- 
tury, accentuated by sweeping draperies. In the later retable 
of the cathedral of Sto. Domingo de la Calzada, the deco- 
rative sections of which are by another hand, the figures by 
Forment exhibit the complete triumph of the Renais- 
sance. 

The sculptors of the first generation. Of the Spaniards 
who actually studied in Italy, Bartolomé Ordonez, a pupil 
of Fancelli, was the most Pa 
Italianate. The statues 
and reliefs from the life of 
St. Eulalia on the choir- 
screen of the cathedral at 
Barcelona reveal him as a 
provincial but not utterly 
unworthy imitator of Mi- 
chael Angelo. For the tomb 
of the Cardinal Cisneros in 
the Church of La Magistral 
at Alcala de Henares, he 
merely modified a design of 
Fancelli, who had _ origi- 
nally received the commis- 
sion, and he developed the 
type to its greatest ornate- 
ness in the sepulchre of a 
Charles V’s parents in the 203—BERRUGUETE. ST. SEBAS- 
fe eebepeleay Granada. suscum, vatuavoum. (eioro. Lu 
The most vigorous and _ costs) 
most Spanish personality in 
this generation was Alonso Berruguete (c. 1486-1561), a fa- 
vored pupil of Buonarroti. He was a true Spaniard in his 
religious emotionalism, which the contortions that the Span- 
ish artists acquired in Italy were eminently fitted to express; 
but he was also a precursor of the nervousness and force of 


368 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the baroque. His style is well illustrated by the figures of his 
first important work after his return to Spain before 1520, 
the wooden retable of 8. Benito, Valladolid, the remains of 
which are now gathered in the Museum of that town (Fig. 
203). The forms are not the powerful nudes of Michael An- 
: gelo, but are rather emac?- 
ated and long drawn out. 
Both in religious fervor and 
in type they seem to 
prophesy El Greco. The 
contrapposto reappears, 
somewhat moderated and 
applied to sturdier figures, 
in his masterpieces, the 
carvings on the upper range 
of stalls in the cathedral of 
Toledo, where, for a time, 
Vigarni codperated with 
him. 

The second generation. 
Juan _de Juni (c. 1507- 
1577) carried Berruguete’s 
contortions and_ religious 
passion into the region of 
disagreeable exaggeration, 

FIG. 204—BECERRA. ST. JEROME. wound the draperies into 

CATHEDRAL, BURGOS hopeless entanglements, and 

colored his material of 

wood with an unusually garish brilliancy and opulence of 
gold. Typical works are the Entombment on the screen 
around the altar of the cathedral at Segovia and the less 
perturbed dead Christ of the Museum at Valladolid. If 
Juan de Juni was the Berruguete of the second generation, 
Gaspar Becerra (c. 1520-1570) was the Ordofiez. The 
retable of the cathedral at Astorga demonstrates his thor- 
ough Italianism and dependence upon Michael Angelo. His ~ 
little statue of St. Jerome in the Chapel of the Constable in 
the cathedral of Burgos (Fig. 204), despite the classical head 
and the mannered elegance of the pose, reveals a Spanish 


THE RENAISSANCE 369 


naturalism and explains Becerra’s fame as an anatomical 
expert. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


The two standard works on the culture of the Italian Renais- 
sance, vying with each other in wealth of material and intelli- 
gence of interpretation, are J. Burckhardt’s The Oivilization of 
the Renaissance in Italy, English translation by S. G. C. Middle- 
more, New York, 1909, and J. A. Symonds’s Renaissance in 
Italy, Seribner’s edition, 1907-1910, one of the seven volumes of 
which is definitely devoted to the Fine Arts and is so felicitous 
in its characterizations as not yet to be antiquated. The 
standard monographs on the Italian sculpture of the epoch are: 
M. Reymond, La sculpture florentine, in four volumes, Florence, 
1897-1900; O. Sirén, Florentinsk Rendssansskulptur, Stockholm, 
1909; W. Bode, Florentiner Bildhauer der Renaissance, Berlin, 
1910; and P. Schubring, Die italienische Plastik des Quattro- 
cento, Berlin, 1919. Copious and excellent photographs of Italian 
sculpture will be found in the two collections by W. Bode, both 
accompanied by a short text, Denkmdaler der Renaissance-Sculp- 
tur Toscanas, Munich, 1892-1905, and Die italienischen Bronze- 
statuetten der Renaissance, Berlin, 1907-1912. The following are 
the most important monographs on the masters of the Quattro- 
cento: on Donatello, A. G. Meyer, Leipzig, 1903, W. Pastor, 
Berlin, 1906, and E. Bertaux, Paris, 1910; on the several members 
of the Della Robbia workshop, the various aspects of their pro- 
duction, and the related atelier of the Buglioni, a series of seven 
books written by A. Marquand with the fullest resources 
of modern scholarship from 1912 and 1922, consisting of cata- 
logues raisonnés and brief, general essays of introduction and 
published at Princeton; on Agostino di Duccio, A. Pointner, 
Strassburg, 1909; on Pollaiuolo, M. Cruttwell, New York, 1907; 
on Verrocchio, H. Mackowsky, Leipzig, 1901, M. Cruttwell, New 
York, 1904, and M. Reymond, Paris, 1906; on Jacopo della 
Quercia, C. Cornelius, Halle, 1896; on Amadeo, F. Malaguzzi 
Valeri, Bergamo, 1904; on Laurana, F. Burger (Strassburg) and, 
more comprehensive, W. Rolfs (Berlin), both of 1907. For 
Sienese sculpture one may turn to P. Schubring, Die Plastik 
Sienas wm Quattrocento, Berlin, 1907. The whole Venetian 
Renaissance in sculpture is superbly treated by L. Planiscig in 
Venezianische Bildhauer der Renaissance, Vienna, 1921. From 
the multiplicity of works on Michael Angelo, the following are 


370 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


particularly reeommended: J. A. Symonds, The Life of Michel- 
angelo Buonarrott, London, 1893; H. Thode, Michelangelo und 
das Hnde der Renaissance, Berlin, 1902-1908, and Michelangelo, 
kritische Untersuchungen, Berlin, 1908-1913; C. Justi, Michel- 
angelo, Berlin, 1909; H. Mackowsky, Michelagniolo, second edi- 
tion, Berlin, 1921; Kk. Frey, Michelagniolos Jugendjahre, Ber- 
lin; and G. Brandes, Michelangelo Buonarrott, Copenhagen, 1921. 
A further course of reading on Benvenuto Cellini may be pur- 
sued in the books of E. Plon, Paris, 1883, H. Foeillon, Paris; 
1910, and R. H. H. Cust, London, 1912. The monographs of 
P. Schonfeld on Andrea Sansovino, Stuttgart, 1881, and of A. 
Desjardins on Giovanni Bologna, Paris, 1883, have not yet lost 
their significance. 

Specialized works on sculpture of the French and Belgian 
Renaissance are provided by: P. Vitry, Jean Goujon, Paris, 1909; 
P. Denis, Ligier Richier, Paris, 1911; R. Hedicke, Jacques 
Dubroeucq von Mons, Strassburg, 1904, and Cornehs Floris, 
Berlin, 1913. B. Daun’s book on Vischer and Krafft, Leipzig, 
1905, has been supplemented by the article of L. Réau, Les bas- 
reliefs de Montrottier, Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1921, II, pp. 225- 
236. Peter Vischer the Younger is studied by G. Seeger, Leipzig, 
1897, and W. Bode in the Jahrbuch der preussischen Kunstsamm- 
lungen, XXIX (1908), pp. 30-48. On Flétner, not only should 
A. Haupt’s monograph, Leipzig, 1904, be read, but also his article 
in the Jahrbuch der preussischen Kunstsammlungen, XXVI 
(1905), pp. 116-135 and 148-168. The Dauher should be studied 
in F. O. Wiegand’s monograph, Strassburg, 1903, and in P. M. 
Halm’s article in the Jahrbuch der preussischen Kunstsamm- 
lungen, XLI (1920), pp. 214-348. The evidence upon Konrad 
Meit is gathered in articles of W. Bode and W. Voge in the 
Jahrbuch, X XII (1901), pp. iv-xvi, and X XIX (1908), pp. 77-118, 
and in the Monatshefte fiir Kunstwissenschaft, VIII (1915), pp. 
37-45. C. Buchwald has written a satisfactory monograph on 
Adriaen de Vries, Leipzig, 1908. For Spanish sculpture of the 
Renaissance, the student is referred to E. Plon, Leone Leona et 
Pompeo Leoni, Paris, 1887; Ad. Fah, Damian Forment in Die 
christliche Kunst, VI (1910), pp. 97-130; and to the monumental 
work of R. de Orueta, Berruguete y su obra, Madrid, 1917. 


CHAPTER XII 
THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 
I. INTRODUCTION 


Chronology. Religion. The seventeenth and, to a lesser 
extent, the eighteenth century were dominated by the style 
called “baroque,” and it was as the originator and dissemina- 
tor of the baroque that Italy still exhibited her genius for 
esthetic invention. In the eighteenth century, however, 
French civilization was so superior that the lighter but more 
exaggerated form of the baroque which was an expression of 
the graceful elegance of Louis X V’s reign and is known as the 
“rococo” diffused itself from France over large sections of 
Europe. As the century progressed, there began to appear on 
every side signs of the reaction from the baroque and rococo 
and of the stricter imitation-of the antique which were to 
develop into neoclassicism. It was in the seventeenth century 
that art experienced the full effects of the revival of Cathol- 
icism in the Counter-Reformation and of the ascendancy of 
the Jesuits. It is the fashion to decry the piety of this art 
as hysterical and insincere. The restlessnessof the baroque 
is, undoubtedly, most painful when it agitates sacred 
subjects, and the naturalism of the style carries with it 
a disagreeable note when, in the spirit of contemporary 
Christianity, it makes celestial visions very concrete. Yet 
with all its shortcomings, the perfervid Catholicism of the 
epoch quickened its figures with more real feeling than the 
largely formal Christianity of the Cinquecento. 

Characteristics of the baroque. The most palpable feature 
of the baroque is a tumultuous passion which seems to belie 
the monumentality of stone or bronze. Wherever the subject 
in any way suggested, and often where, to the ordinary mind, 

ofl 


{ 
1 J 


372 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the subject would not seem to suggest it, the figures were 
represented in movement; and the contortions of Michael 
Angelo were continued and even increased. As the nudities 
and mythologies of the sixteenth century lost something of 
their vogue, the draperies acquired greater-significance in | 
the general effect; and the impression of agitation was accen- 
tuated by exaggerated flutters of wide-flung expanses of 
carved stuffs. The sculptor sought more definite pictorial ef- 
fects than ever before. He conceived his figures in pictorial 
postures and groups, often, as we have seen, in movement, and 
he set them in the midst of rocks, fabrics, clouds, and other 
scenic accessories, so that sculpture in the round was amalga- 
mated with backgrounds into species of great reliefs. He 
even confused sculpture and painting in the same work, using 
painted backgrounds for sculptured figures, adorning the 
frames of pictures with figures in the round, or placing 
painted and sculptural decoration side by side. The figure 
was not designed to have value as a separate entity, but 
rather as ai constituent of great decorative compositions. 
Draperies were broken up and forms were modelled in such a 
way as to achieve strong, pictorial contrasts of light and 
shade, and arrangements of colored marbles were cultivated. 
If some of these qualities be judged lapses from the purest 
taste, it must at least be acknowledged that the baroque 
clothed them in the perfection of technical skill developed 
by the long experience and practice of the Renaissance. The 
devotion to the antique was still widespread but less servile. 
In place of the expressionless heads and coldly statuesque 
bodies of the sixteenth century, there now appeared a revived 
naturalism which was more pronounced in Caravaggio and 
the school of painting in the seventeenth century that he 
founded. The pleasantest manifestations of naturalism are 
seen first in the portrait busts, which are once more vigor- 
ously individualized as compared with the vacuous specimens 
of the Cinquecento, and, second, in the putti, which rival 
those of the Quattrocento in charm. But the crowning virtue 
of the baroque was that it attained a grandiose impressive- 
ness. If its compositions are theatrical, they have at least 
the same value as well managed stage pictures. Yet the 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 373 


closest parallel to the baroque is not the theatre, at least the 
theatre of the present day. The artist of the seventeenth 
century conceived his arrangements, postures, and gestures 
rather in the more pompous mode exhibited by the best 
traditions of our modern grand opera. 

Characteristics of the rococo. “Rococo” really refers to 
the greater exuberance of architectural decoration which was 
a further development from the baroque and was loath to 
leave any part of an edifice unembellished; but the term has 
been loosely extended to describe the general style of sculp- 
ture and even of painting in the eighteenth century. Com- 
pared to the baroque, the rococo ornament is lighter and 
airier in spirit, more fantastic and saccharine in its motifs, 
and more adverse to straight lines and angles. When the 
figure was employed in monumental decoration, it naturally 
conformed to the prevalent standards; and even detached 
statues and reliefs, not designed for any building, were 
affected by the tendency of the time. The tempo of the 
baroque was increased to a presto, the draperies floated and 
wound hither and thither with even more unrestrained 
abandon, a statue or group was cluttered with distracting ac- 
cessories according to what has been called the ‘‘centrifugal” 
proclivity of the baroque, and the composition was more in- 
volved. Inasmuch as the character that the rococo took in 
France was imitated in many parts of Europe, the ultra- 
refinement of society in that country was reflected every- 
where in a greater nicety and subtlety than appears in 
baroque sculpture, in slighter forms, in daintiness and pretti- 
ness; and the carefree spirit of the epoch manifested itself 
in a tone of gaiety and sweetness. 


TP TAG, 


Bernim. Many elements of the baroque existed embryoni- 
cally in the sculpture of the late Cinquecento, but it was the 
genius of Giovanni Lorenzo Bernini (1598-1680) that gath- 
ered them together, developed them, and impressed upon the 
baroque its definitive form. His youthful work, the Apollo 
and Daphne, in the Villa Borghese, Rome, already pos- 


374 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


sesses the greater movement of the baroque. The choice of 
a more fleeting moment than is common to the monumental 
nature of sculpture in the round illustrates at once the pic- 
torial attitude. The remote dependence of the Apollo upon 
the statue of the Belvedere (cf. Fig. 71) is a case in point 
of the way in which he merely caught suggestions from the 
antique; it also taught him technical secrets and the custom 
of high finish. All of his early achievements, indeed, ex- 
hibit a technical dexterity 
rarely, if ever, equalled in 
the world’s history. We 
may condemn the applica- 
tion of this dexterity to the 
counterfeiting of skin and 
flesh in the Daphne, as in 
other works of Bernini we 
take exception to the simu- 
lation of various fabrics; 
but we cannot withhold 
our. amazement. In a 
number of superb exam- 
ples, he began the tradition | 
of the fountains of the 
baroque, which are treated 
naturalistically, like scenes 
from aquatic life, with as- 
FIG. 205—BERNINI. FOUNTAIN OF semblages of marine dei- 
TRITON. PIAZZA BARBERINI, ROME ties, monsters, and pic- 
turesque accessories of veg- 

etation, shell, and cliff, in contrast to the more formal archi- 
tecture of the Tuscan fountains of the sixteenth century. 
The two most famous specimens at Rome for which we 
are indebted to Bernini are the smaller Fountain of the 
Triton in the Piazza Barberini (Fig, 205) and the towering 
Fountain of the Four River Gods in the Piazza Navona 
(executed by his pupils). So, in mortuary art (Fig. 206), 
utilizing suggestions from the tombs of the late Renaissance, 
he established the definitive type for the restless baroque 
sepulchres in which the figures perform dramatic réles. The 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 375 


Virtues no longer stare forth at the spectator as entities 
dissociated from the effigy except in their symbolism; 
by mourning for the deceased they are brought into an emo- 
tional relation to the main subject and make the tomb a 
unified dramatic whole. The personification of Death enters 
upon his baroque popularity as a sepulchral actor. In his 


FIG. 206—BERNINI AND PUPILS. TOMB OF ALEXANDER VII. ST. PETERS, 
ROME. (PHOTO. ANDERSON ) 


portrait busts (Fig. 207), Bernini not only resuscitated the 
power of incisive characterization, but by a selection of the 
best qualities in his sitters, by stress upon the elements in 
their personalities common to the several recurring types to 
which they belong, by a partial idealization, and by ingenuity 
in composition, he raised them from the sphere of the par- 
ticular into objects of universal interest and beauty. In his 


376 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


most celebrated religious work, the Ecstasy of St. Theresa in 
S. Maria della Vittoria, Rome (1646), all the signs of the 
baroque are present in their most typical expression, the 
unpleasantly realistic conception of the heavenly experience, 
the fervor of Jesuitical 
Catholicism, dramatic pos- 
tures, the endlessly broken 
and .disordered_ draperies, 
the pictorial setting of 
clouds and gilded rays, the 
theatrical lighting from an 
unseen source. Henceforth 
there was a constant cre- 
scendo in the passion and 
tragic intensity of his sa- 
cred figures; and the lines 
of the form and of the gar- 
ments were more and more 
adapted rather to general 
decorative schemes than to 
the natural activity of the 
FIG. 207—BERNINI. COSTANZA BUONA- boda eae suth eS 
RELLI. BARGELLO, FLORENCE. (PHOTO. the two angels of the Pas- 
ALIN ARI) sion for the Ponte S. An- 

gelo at Rome, now in §. 
Andrea delle Fratte, even the most loyal apologist for Ber- 
nini must admit a certain exaggeration. His most pretentious 
sacred composition is the shrine for St. Peter’s Chair that 
forms so garish but so impressive an accent at the extreme 
east end of S. Pietro in Vaticano (Fig. 208). 

Berninw’s followers. Bernini’s immediate pupils, some of 
them men of considerable talent, by their assistance made 
possible the completion of his numerous gigantic schemes, 
and were instrumental in diffusing the new style in other 
parts of Italy and Europe. The most important of these 
disseminators was Ercole Ferrata (1610-1686). 

The conservative tendency. There are two Italian sculp- 
tors who are usually asserted to have been the leaders of a 
more conservative tradition that was more faithful to the 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 377 


antique and partially opposed to the innovations of Bernini. 
he elder was Francois Duquesnoy, a Fleming by birth, and 


FIG. 208—BERNINI. SHRINE FOR ST. PETER’S CHAIR. ST. PETER’S, ROME 


therefore called I] Fiammingo (1594-1643). The St. Susanna 
of S. Maria di Loreto, Rome, perhaps based upon an ancient 
Urania in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, shows that some- 


378 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


times, at least, he did not indulge in such passionate ex- 
pression as Bernini. He was renowned also for his gentle, 
Rubens-like puttz, in which he was among the first, if not 
the first, in sculpture, to render adequately the peculiarly 
unformed quality of infantile anatomy (Fig. 209). But the 
St. Andrew of the crossing 
of St. Peter’s betrays the 
fact that not even Duques- 
noy could withstand the 
onsweeping stream of the 
baroque. By his multipli- 
cation of objects of virtu, 
he established the vogue of 
small terracottas, ivories, 
and bronzes in the seven- 
teenth and eighteenth cen- 
turies. Philistinism — to- 
wards the baroque is some- 
what less palpable in Ber- 
nini’s rival at Rome, Ales- 
sandro Algardi (1602- 
1654). He lacked Ber- 
nini’s sense of imposing 
decorative composition, and 
he sometimes inclined to- 
wards a prettiness that is a 
foretaste of the rococo. His 

tomb of Leo XI in St. Pe- 
FIG. 209—FRANGOIS DUQUESNOY. CUPID 


‘ , 
CARVING A BOW. KAISER FRIEDRICH ters corresponds, in: -cn= 
MUSEUM, BERLIN eral, to Bernini’s sepulchre 


of Urban VIII, although 
the two allegorical figures are more coldly classical and not 
so well keyed to the emotional tone of the monument. His 
religious figures, such as those above the door in the in- 
terior of S. Ignazio, Rome, often follow prevailing fashion. 
In the bronze statue of Innocent X in the Palazzo dei Con- 
servatori, Rome, and in certain other portraits, he surpassed 
his rival in forceful individualization. His most significant 
work, which exerted an enormous influence upon the develop- 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 379 


ment of highly pictorial relief in the next two centuries, is 
the altarpiece of St. Leo and Attila for the Cappella Leonina 
of St. Peter’s (Fig. 210), a more absolute transcription into 
marble of a dramatic and agitated baroque painting than even 
Bernini permitted himself. 


FIG. 210—ALGARDI. ALTARPIECE OF ST. LEO AND ATTILA. ST. PETER’S, ROME. 
(PHOTO. ANDERSON ) 


The eighteenth century. Generally speaking, the rococo 
obtained little hold in Italy, and the baroque persisted, not 
much modified, until the neoclassic revolution. Pietro Bracci 
(1700-1773) may be taken as typical of the high eighteenth 
century at Rome. His feminine forms and his angels have 
that somewhat greater tenderness and sweetness which are 
almost the only signs in Italy of the presence of the rococo. 


380 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


The height of his achievement, under the inspiration of 
Bernini, is represented by the Neptune, Tritons, and sea- 
horses a the Fontana di Trevi (Fig. 211). 


FIG. 211—FONTANA DI TREVI, ROME 


III. FRANCE 
A. THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 
1. Introduction 


Although in France the plastic style-of the. baroque ob- 
tained a hold in sacred subjects and in the tombs of the later 
seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries, the most significant 
French sculpture of the seventeenth century was of a different 
sort and constituted one of the manifestations of what is 
called French classicism. The triumph of classicism oc- 
curred during the personal rule of Louis XIV from 1661 to 
1715; the earlier years of the seventeenth century led up to 
this consummation, The French classic manner in sculpture 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 381 


was derived from the late Italian Renaissance and _ the 
antique, but it was impressed with a dryness, elegance, and 
formality that may be paralleled in French literature of the 
period. Inevitably it adopted certain baroque characteris- 
tics, such as the addiction to movement and to pictorial 
accessories, accommodating them to its more sedate and 
ordered harmonies. The centralization of power in the mon- 
arch tended to localize artistic effort about the court, to 
confine its themes to the glorification of the King and his 
circle, to bestow upon it a certain pompousness, and to reduce 
it to a more or less monotonous unity that partially sup- 
pressed artistic individuality. The general evolution was 
assisted, as early as 1648, by the foundation of the Academy 
of Painting and Sculpture, which followed the trend of the 
times in subjecting art to a system of definite rules. The 
old Gallic naturalism persisted, indeed, in the portraits and 
sepulchral effigies, but even here it was often muffled, to a 
certain extent, by the tyranny of classicism. : 


2. The Reign of Henry IV 


The accession of the Bourbons with Henry IV (1589-1610) 
began a period of transition from the Renaissance proper 
to the style of Louis XIV. Under Henry IV a considerable 
influence was exercised by the works of Giovanni Bologna, 
whose mannered follower, the Italianized Fleming, Pierre 
Franqueville (c. 1550-1615), was then enjoying a great vogue 
in France. The most prominent sculptor of this reign was 
Barthélemy Prieur .(c. 1540-1611). The three allegorical 
figures from the monument for the heart of Anne de Mont- 
morency, now in the Louvre, suggest not so much the highly 
personal treatment of women by Goujon and Pilon as the 
rather frigid and mannered treatment by Giovanni Bologna. 
The kneeling Marie de Barbancon-Cany, also in the Louvre, 
shows how sculptors were losing something of their grip 
upon incisive characterization in sepulchral effigies. The fig- 
ures of Fame, or, as the French then called them, Renom- 
mées, and the four little genii of human activities, that he 
did for the exterior of the Petite Galerie of the Louvre, betray 


382 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the increasing tendency to a more arid and heavier class- 
icism. 


3. The Reign of Louis XIII and the Minority of Louis XIV 


From the death of Henry IV to Louis XIV’s personal 
assumption of rule in 1661, the advance towards classicism 
became more perceptible, largely through the centralizing 
measures of the ministers Richelieu and Mazarin. The sculp- 


FIG. 212—F. ANGUIER. TOMB OF JACQUES DE SOUVRE. LOUVRE, PARIS. 


tors of the time were good, honest masters, but rarely in- 
spired. Jacques Sarrazin (c. 1588-1660) is important in the 
history of French tombs for stressing, as in the monument 
for the heart of Henri, de Condé, now in the chapel of Chan- 
tilly, the use of the allegorical figures that were the fad of 
the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Although the 
naturalistic tradition has reasserted itself in his kneeling 
Cardinal de Bérulle of the Louvre, he generally cultivated 
the rather cold and rhetorical classicism that is well illus- 
trated by his caryatides for the attic of the Pavillon de 
l’Horloge of the same building. In the productions of the 
Anguier brothers little medieval realism is left. Francois 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 383 


Anguier (1604-1669) made a specialty of tombs, usually 
classicizing now even the portraits, as on the elaborate monu- 
ment of Henri de Montmorency in the chapel of the Lycée 
at Moulins. The effigies, such as the Jacques de Souvré 
(Fig. 212), may even be represented nude or semi-nude, 
agonizing like dying Gauls and foreshadowing the later dra- 
matic conceptions of the tomb. In contrast to his brother, 
Michel Anguier (1612-1686) found his talent to lie in the 
direction of architectural adornment. His embellishment of 
the ceilings of Anne of Austria’s apartments in the Louvre, 
of the Parisian church of Val-de-Grace, and of the Porte 
St. Denis constitutes a French classic interpretation of ba- 
roque decoration, in which he has retained much Gallic feel- 
ing for femininity and for grace of drapery. 


4. The Reign of Louis XIV 


Introductory. Louis XIV carried centralization to such a 
point that he made his chief palace of Versailles, and not 
Paris, the capital of France, and he lavished works of art 
upon it in order to raise it to the dignity of such an honor. 
Even the sculpture of the period was dominated by the 
favorite painter and esthetic arbiter of the court, Charles 
Le Brun, who often drew the designs from which the sculp- 
tors worked. Particularly in sepulchral monuments, his 
influence united with that of Bernini to produce the dramatic 
and pictorial effects which did not attain their full develop- 
ment until the eighteenth century. 

Coysevox. The most characteristic sculptor under Louis 
XIV was Antoine Coysevox (1640-1720). Within the limits 
of classicism, he possessed vigor, invention, high technical 
ability, and a lively sense of personal beauty. Of his many 
mythological and allegorical creations, the most familiar are 
the mounted Fame and Mercury, now at the entrance to 
the gardens of the Tuileries. According to contemporary 
taste, in his representations of the sovereign, such as the 
standing bronze in the Hotel Carnavalet, Paris, he used the 
pompous costume of a Roman conqueror; but in his portrait 
busts of other persons (Fig. 213) and in his sepulchral effi- 


384 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


FIG. 213—cCOYSEVOX. BUST OF LE 
BRUN. LOUVRE, PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAU- 
DON) 


gies, the power of the char- 
acterization is scarcely 
dimmed by the tendencies 
of the times. He was em- 
ployed on a large number 
of tombs, usually collabo- 
rating with others and 
working upon _ others’ 
sketches; the most preten- 
tious example is the mauso- 
leum of Mazarin, now in 
the Louvre. 

Girardon. The art of 
Francois Girardon (1628- 
1715), Le Brun’s favorite 
sculptural agent, does not 
differ essentially from that 
of Coysevox. It is some- 
what less heroic, more 
graceful, and _ therefore 
more French. Characteris- 


tic are his stucco embellishments of the Galerie d’Apollon in 
the Louvre and his productions for fountains at Versailles, 
especially the leaden relief of bathing Nymphs in the Bain 
de Diane, surprising in their easy freshness and naturalism 


FIG. 214—GIRARDON. SECTION OF RELIEF OF BATHING NYMPHS. BAIN DE 
DIANE, VERSAILLES 


‘THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 385 


(Fig. 214). His most famous work is the tomb of Richelieu, 
in the church of the Sorbonne, where the different figures are 
brought together in greater unity than by Bernini. After 
the precedent of Francois Anguier’s agonizing effigies,. the 
top of the sarcophagus is now conceived as the bed of death, 
and the dying Cardinal is upheld by Religion and lamented 
by Science at his feet. 

The Coustou. Of Coysevox’s nephews and pupils, Nicolas 
and Guillaume Coustou I, the former (1658-1733) was little 
more than a gifted follower 
of his uncle, attaining at 
times a certain magnifi- 
cence and animation of 
pose (Fig. 215). Nicolas 
began and Guillaume fin- 
ished the relief of Louis 
XIV crossing the Rhine in 
the vestibule of the chapel 
at Versailles, one of those 
pompous allegorical repre- 
sentations of the king that 
were the delight of classi- 
cism. Guillaume Coustcu 
I? (1677-1746) was less 
bound by the classic tradi- 
tions, and already revealed 
the effects of the resuscita- 
tion of realism in the eight- 
eenth century. His master- 
pieces are the prancing ¥. 215—NICOLAS COUSTOU. DUKE DE 
horses and their nude tam- provence. (PHOTO. GIRKUDON) 
ers on the Place de_ la 
Concorde (Fig. 216), opposite to the equestrian groups of 
Coysevox, to which they are superior in modelling and 
movement. Lady Dilke has pointed out that the use of 
horses as principal motifs denotes a return from the realm 
of mythology and allegory to an interest in nature. The 


*So-called to distinguish him from his son, also a sculptor, Guil- 
laume Coustou II. 


386 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


FIG. 216—GUILLAUME COUSTOU I. HORSES OF MARLY. CHAMPS ELYSEES, 
PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 


statue of Louis XV’s queen, 
Marie Leczinska, as Juno, 
in the Louvre, has already 
the sprightliness of the 
eighteenth century. The 
bust of his own brother, 
Nicolas, in the same Mu- 
seum, has sloughed off the 
haughty idealization of the 
seventeenth century in fa- 
vor of the growing nat- 
uralism. 
Puget. Living for the 
most part away from the 
court and its classicism and 
making long sojourns in 
Italy, Pierre Puget of Mar- 
seilles (1622-1694) became 
FIG. 217—PUGET. MILO OF CROTON. the only thoroughly ba- 
LOUVRE, PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON ) ; 
roque sculptor among great 
French masters; but he was 
characterized by a more pronounced addiction to the colossal 
and muscular than the Italians of the seventeenth 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 387 


century and by a less highly developed sense of physical 
beauty. In modelling he achieved the most naturalistic ac- 
curacy. As in the case of Giovanni Bologna, there is some- 
times an unpleasant incongruity between the huge forms and 
the exquisite gestures. His most renowned works, all now in 
the Louvre, are the Milo.of Croton (Fig. 217), the Perseus 
delivering Andromeda, and the relief of Alexander and 
Diogenes. 


B. THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 
1. Introductory 


Sporadically, the classic tradition remained undisturbed; 
but, very generally, especially by the middle of the cen- 
tury, the staidness of the style of Louis XIV yielded to the 
rococo. The generalizing sentiment of the statuary of the 
former century gave way to a certain “individualization and 
even intimacy” of feeling and to the desire for sensitiveness 
in art. By a strange paradox, in the midst of the factitious 
civilization under Louis XV, the tendency to return to real 
nature also manifested itself, inspired. in some degree by 
the writings of Rousseau. Shaking off the hampering pom- 
posity of Louis XIV’s age, the portrait busts and statues often 
avoided even the mannerisms of the rococo, so that, as direct, 
simple, and vigorous likenesses, they vie with the best that 
the world has produced. Sometimes the increased naturalism 
took the shape of a sensuality in accord with French life 
of the epoch. Another influence made for greater freedom. 
The court and the Academy lost something of their monopoly 
upon art and were obliged to share their esthetic interests 
with the enlightened Parisians. The painter Boucher suc- 
ceeded Le Brun in the artistic dictatorship, but he ruled less 
absolutely. Even religious production conformed to the gen- 
eral gaiety and sweetness of the rococo. In its vivacity and 
elegance, in its appreciation of femininity, in its marvellous 
skill in reproducing different fabrics and the texture of the 
skin, the sculpture of the eighteenth century is one of the 
most characteristic expressions of French genius. To the 


388 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


more archeological and quieter form that the French rococo 
assumed in the second half of the century at the approach 
of neoclassicism, the term, the style of Louis XVI, is some- 
times applied. 

The tombs. During this century the dramatization ofthe 
tomb was consummated. The allegorical figures were knit 
together in some action glorifying the character of the de- 
ceased, or some event in his life was reproduced allegor- 
ically. Most interesting are the several tombs in which 
Death is one of the actors, now summoning the victim, now 
struggling with the victim’s husband or wife, or with a repre- 
sentative of Immortality. However false the theatrical agi- 
tation may seem to our eyes, however unsuited to the so- 
lemnity of death, yet it must be admitted that the age 
showed astounding ingenuity in devising and surprising power 
in executing its conceptions. 


2. The First Generation of the Eighteenth Century 


The standard of the old 
classicism was chiefly up- 
held by Edme Bouchardon 
(1698-1762), although in 
his admiration for ancient 
art he was influenced also 

. by the theories of neoclas- 
sicism. One gets the i1m- 
pression that his work 
tended to be labored, con- 
scious, and_ theoretical. 
The destroyed bronze 
equestrian statue of Louis 
XV, known to us in engrav- 
ings and in two. small 

re bronzes of the Museums of 

FIG. 218—LEMOYNE. BUST OF GABRIEL. the Touvre and Versailles 
LOUVRE, PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) : } 

was still severely aca- 
demic; but at the same time it followed the fashion of the 
slimmer steeds of the eighteenth century. The fountain of 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 389 


the Rue de Grenelle, Paris, is likewise classically restrained 
in architectural composition and in the style of the three cen- 
tral figures of Paris, the Seine, and the Marne; but the 
French rococo has claimed its own in the mannered poses and 
realistic nudes of the adolescent genii of the Seasons and in 
the softness, naturalism, and playfulness of the accompanying 
reliefs of putt. Although the idea of the Cupid cutting him- 
self a bow from Hercules’s club, now in the Louvre, is in 
accord with the mincing temper of the rococo, its execution 
foreshadows the archeology of neoclassicism. 

Jean Baptiste Lemoyne (1704-1778) inaugurated the style 
of Louis XV more definitely. His Bathing Flora has the 
daintiness and feminine charm so peculiar to the period; 
but it is his long series of busts (Fig. 218) that in their 
directness, liveliness, and 
lack of affectation best pro- 
claim the new age. 


3. The Second Generation of 
the Eighteenth Century 


Pigalle. The most com- 
prehensive plastic exponent 
of the period was Jean Bap- 
tiste Pigalle (1714-1785), al- 
though he did not illustrate 
all its aspects in their most 
pronounced form. His mas- 
terpiece is the Mercury at- 
taching his sandals, the first 
terracotta sketch of which 

. FIG. 219—PIGALLE. CHILD WITH CAGE: 
may be seen in the Metro- LOUVRE, PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 
politan Museum. The choice 
of a kinetic rather than a static moment, the other pictorial 
elements, the complication of attitude, the svelte grace of the 
body, the anatomical science, and technical dexterity—all 
these qualities make the Mercury a touchstone by which we 
may prove the art of the eighteenth century. Throughout 


390 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


his life Pigalle sporadically devoted himself to such typically 
rococo themes as the Amour and Amitié of the Louvre, and 
he appealed to the taste of his contemporaries also in his 
forms of children engaged in pretty little activities (Fig. 219). 
Since, however, he possessed a vigorously masculine character, 
his feminine figures are less successful than his representa- 
tions of men, they are less bewitching than the women of Fal- 
conet and Clodion, and they do not accord quite so thor- 
oughly with the standards of the time. It is rather the trend 
of the eighteenth century 
towards realism that is up- 
permost in his production. 
His nudes and his puttz de- 
pend more directly upon 
the living model than do 
those of his contempora- 
ries. A misunderstanding _ 
of ancient practice and a 
desire for the heroic com- 
bined with his anatomical 
enthusiasm to provoke the 
anomaly of representing 
Voltaire as nude in the 
statue now in the entry of 
the Library of the Insti- 
tute, Paris, and of using an 
old soldier as the model for 
the body. Although in real- 
ria. 220—picanie. toms or tHe ism his busts outdo those 
COMTE D’HARCOURT. CATHEDRAL, PARIS of Houdon, he was not the 

greatest portraitist of his 
day. In his tombs he incorporated the noblest development 
of the sepulchral drama, and attained that grandeur of style 
which was often suppressed in him by the tyranny of the 
rococo. The most famous example was erected for the Comte 
de Saxe in the church of St. Thomas at Strassburg. The 
illustration (Fig. 220) is taken from the monument of another 
great Marshal of France, the Comte d’Harcourt. 


, THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 391 


Falconet. Etienne Maurice Falconet (1716-1791) repre- 
sents for us the highest possibilities of the French style of 
the eighteenth century, freed from its more pronounced and 
extravagant phases. In the Music of the Louvre (Fig. 221) 
he calmed and restrained the fashionable flutterings and 
involutions; the Bathing Girl of the same Museum tran- 
scends the standards of the time in its truth to nature and 
is disembarrassed of Lemoyne’s rococo mannerisms in the 
treatment of the same sub- 
ject. Like the majority of 
his contemporaries, he fur- 
nished models for the man- 
ufacture of Sevres china, 
and his larger works were 
also repeated in that me- 
dium. The drawings of the 
painter Boucher often were 
forced upon the sculptors 
as the basis for their Sévres 
models, but Falconet some- 
times managed to adapt 
them to his own ideas. His 
most important object of 
virtu is the clock of the 
three Graces, existing in 
marble in the Louvre and 
also in a number of Sévres | 

ies FIG. 221—FALCONET. MUSIC. LOUVRE, 
repetitions. In the cul- PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 
minating work of his ca- 
reer, the bronze equestrian statue of Peter the Great at Petro- 
grad, in accordance with the proclivities of contemporary 
art and with the precedent set by Tacca, both rider_and 
horse are represented in activity, the emperor blessing his 
people and the splendid animal prancing in the air. 

Caffierr. Jean Jacques Caffieri (1725-1792) lays a claim 
upon our consideration principally because of his portrait 
busts. (Fig. 222). Although somewhat idealized, they are 
withal excellent characterizations; but he endeavored to give 
them the effect of decorative sculptures by turning the drap- 


392 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


ery and even the hair in pretty rococo swirls, and he endowed 
them with a gaze that is instinct with the nervousness and 
alertness of the rococo. 
Most famous are the ten 
examples of literary and 
theatrical celebrities in the 
foyer of the Théatre Fran- 
cals. 


4. The Third Generation of 
the Eighteenth Century 


Pajou. Like the other 
masters who lived through 
the beginning of the nine- 
teenth century, Augustin 
Pajou. (1730-1809) was 
only slightly affected by 
neoclassicism,. which had 
developed before he died. 
FIG. 222—cCAFFIERI. BUST OF THE He remained a confirmed 
SCULPTOR VAN CLEVE. Louvre, paris. devotee of the rococo until 
(PHOTO. GIRAUDON) the latter part of his life, 

stressing pleasantly its 
sweetness and soft sensuality. The frequent slovenliness of 
modelling is due to his own too great productive facility and 
to the extensive participation of assistants in his commis- 
sions; the somewhat greater dryness of his style, as compared 
with the general output of the eighteenth century in France, 
possibly betokens the approach of neoclassicism. Character- 
istic specimens of his achievement are the Bacchante and the 
Queen Marie Leczinska as Charity in the Louvre and, among 
his many productions as architectural decorator, the plastic 
embellishment of the Opéra at Versailles, where he employed 
as his chief material wood. The work in which he made most 
concessions to neoclassicism is the Psyche of the Louvre. A 
certain dryness intruded also into his statues of celebrities, 
emptying them partially of life (with the exception of the 
Pascal of the Institute) and setting in its place pompousness. 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 393 


According to that false archeological taste of the time which 
is illustrated by Pigalle’s undraped Voltaire, he represented 
Buffon as semi-nude, in the statue of the Museum of Natural 
History, Paris, conceiving him as an ancient philosopher and 
surrounding him with attributes. Pajou’s defects are happily 
absent from his many portrait busts, which constitute his 
most precious bequest to posterity. One may gauge the high 
measure of his ability in this phase of his art by the Lemoyne 
and Buffon of thesLouvre, the Hubert Robert of the Ecole 
des Beaux Arts, and his 
several versions of Madame 
du Barry (Fig. 223). 
Clodion. It is curious 
that the French rococo 
should have waited. until 
the moment of its dissolu- 
tion to find in Claude 
Michel, called Clodicn 
(1738-1814), its most pro- 
- nounced exponent. He 
realized the full possibili- 
ties of its daintiness and 
playfulness. He _ treated 
his abundant nudes with ~ 
more fresh naturalism than 
any of his predecessors or 
contemporaries, often turn- 
ing sensuality into licen- FG. 223—PAJOU. BUST OF MADAME 
Rene PNOMother' (at U_RT, MuMwTENs couiacro. 
tained to such a degree the sirumenTHaL) 
briskness of movement de- 
manded by the esthetic ideals of his day. The supreme 
dexterity with which he met the exigencies of this animation 
and of other aspects of his art is another token of the times. 
His subjects of predilection were nymphs and satyrs, bac- 
chantes, sports of Nereids, and romps of putti, employed in 
decorative friezes for houses, as on the Hotel de Chambrun, 
Paris, but especially in small statuettes and groups of terra- 
cotta, a medium in which his facile hand and his genius for 


394 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


improvisation expressed his conceptions most characteris- 
tically (Fig. 224). 

Houdon. Jean Antoine Houdon (1741-1828) impresses us 
as very modern because his production is more or less inde- 
pendent of any esthetic movement or century. Enrolling 
himself in the school of nature; he followed her as a pre- 
ceptress with far more absolute devotion than could have 
been inspired by the timid naturalism of his day, already 
half suppressed by em- 
bryonic neoclassicism. In 
a few of his imaginative 
statues, he inevitably paid 
homage to the tastes of his 
fellows. The Vestal Virgin, 
formerly in the Morgan 
Collection, is somewhat 
neoclassic; and in the Bai- 
gneuse of the Metropolitan 
Museum he surpassed Fal- 
conet in Falconet’s own 
manner. A celebrated in- 
stance of his own artistic 
principles is afforded by the 
early Diana, the most ac- 
cessible replica of which is 
the bronze of the Louvre: 
FIG. 224—cLopion. NYMPH AND classical only in subject 


SATYR. METROPOLITAN MUSEUM, NEW and rococo only in its love 
YORK. (COURTESY OF THE METRO- 


POLITAN MUSEUM} of femininity, the statue is, 

in reality, a superb and 
naturalistic study of the nude. It is, nevertheless, rather his 
vast number of portrait busts (Fig. 225) and his few portrait 
statues that have made his fame secure. No other sculptor, 
except a few of the greatest Italian masters of the fifteenth 
century, and perhaps Bernini, has realized so well the aim 
of true portraiture, the emphasis upon the most characteristic 
traits of the sitter, to the exclusion of the irrelevant, the at- 
tainment of a just balance between individualization and 
generalization, and the ennoblement and beautification of the 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 395 


whole so that the portrait 
becomes an enduring work 
of art, the perpetuation of 
a type as well as of a single 
personality. The most re- 
nowned example is the 
seated Voltaire in the Thé- 
atre Francais (Fig. 226), 
in which he followed con- 
temporary taste so far as 
to admit the costume of an 
ancient sage but rejected 
the archeological caprice 
of the nudity or semi-nu- 
dity of Pigalle’s and Pa- 
jou’s similar portraits. Our 
own country is fortunate | 
enough to possess another 
portrait statue by Houdon, FIG. 225—HOUDON. BUST OF LOUISE 


Vashington in the BRONGNIART. LOUVRE, PARIS. 
‘at Richmond. 


IV. BELGIUM 
A. THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 


The transition. In the first half of the century, the field 
was occupied by the Italian style that was transitional from 
the late Renaissance to the baroque. With the exception 
of the expatriated Francois Duquesnoy, the most talented 
sculptor of the period was Artus Quellin I of Antwerp 
(1609-1668). He reminds us of contemporary French clas- 
sicists, but he had more respect for nature and a more pro- 
nounced inelination—towards.the baroque. His greatest 
undertaking, in conjunction with his assistants, was the 
elaborate decoration of the exterior and interior of the 
Town Hall, now the Royal Palace, at Amsterdam. His 
masterpiece is the east wall of the court-room in this edifice. 


396 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


FIG. 226—HOUDON. VOLTAIRE. THEATRE FRANCAIS, PARIS. (PHOTO. 
GIRAUDON ) 


The symbolic reliefs reveal a moderate form of baroque 
pictorial treatment. The allegorical caryatides, the opu- 
lence of whose forms is derived from Rubens, possess the 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 397 


surprising naturalism in the modelling of the nude that is 
characteristic of Quellin. 

The developed style of the seventeenth century. In the 
second half of the century, Belgian sculpture took two 
forms: it was either an adaptation of the Italian baroque 
or was based upon Rubens’s interpretation of the baroque. 
The great painter sometimes provided sketches upon which 
the sculptors worked, and even the more Italianate group 
were affected by his fashionable style. His buxom feminine 
figures were peculiarly popular. Now and then an inclina- 
tion towards French classicism manifested itself; in par- 
ticular, the dramatic and allegorical tombs of France were 
occasionally imitated. Wood continued to hold sway as a 
favorite medium, but baroque contrasts of black and white 
marble were also much in vogue. The sculptor who most 
faithfully transcribed the mode and ideas of Rubens into 
plastic expression was Luc Faydherbe of Malines (1617- 
1697). A convincing example of this relationship is the 
relief of the Road to Calvary on a pendentive of the dome 
in Notre Dame de Hanswyck at Malines, embodying the 
extreme form that, because of his dependence upon Rubens, 
the pictorial tendencies of the baroque took in Faydherbe. 
His most important work is the partially dramatized tomb 
of the Archbishop Cruesen in the cathedral of Malines. He 
also did small ivories after Rubens’s designs, for instance, 
a relief of a satyr and putt: in the Prado, Madrid, repeated 
almost exactly in a terracotta of the Musée du Cinquan- 
tenaire, Brussels. The chief representative of the more 
Italianate style was Bernini’s pupil, Jean Delcour, active 
principally in Liége (1627-1707). Though he throws his 
draperies into an even more confused agitation than Bernini, 
‘he was endowed with a noble sense of personal beauty. In 
addition to his essentially religious work, he was in demand 
for the erection of fountains and tombs. The monument 
of the Bishop Eugéne d’Allamont in the cathedral of Ghent 
is like the first dramatic tombs of France, except that the 
sacred figures are much more Italian. The bronze sepul- 
chral bust of Lambert de Liverloo in the Archeological 
Museum at Liége has the power of Bernini’s and Algardi’s 
portraits. 


FIG. 227—JAN FRANS VAN GEEL AND JAN VAN HOOL. PULPIT OF CHURCH 
OF ST. ANDRE, ANTWERP. CALLING OF STS. PETER AND ANDREW. (PHOTO. 


THILL) 


398 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 399 


B. THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 


The baroque continued to reign, now with extreme license, 
until the classical revival, but the sacred figures often as- 
sumed the rococo modifications. The most peculiarly Bel- 
gian expression of the style is found in the wooden pulpits 
(Fig. 227). The lower part or even the whole pulpit 
becomes a bower of landscape or a rocky grotto, in the 
midst of which a religious or allegorical episode is enacted 
by large figures in the round. The canopy over the pul- 
pit is also treated in the elaborate pictorial manner, carved 
with clouds and putti, with a sacred figure among baroque 
appurtenances, or with a continuation of the landscape from 
below. Scarcely less sensational are the wooden confes- 
sionals, notably those of the church of Ninove by Theodor 
Verhaegen (1701-1759) and one of his pupils. 


V. HoLLAND 


Introductory. During the baroque and rococo periods, 
it was only in the seventeenth century that Holland pro- 
duced important sculpture. Protestantism entailed a pro- 
scription of religious art, which was the principal field of 
the baroque. Sculpture was therefore largely confined to 
the adornment of secular edifices and tombs, and the dec- 
orative figures of these were executed rather in a dry classic 
style developed from the precedents of the late Italian 
Renaissance. The baroque manifested itself in little else 
than the pictorial accessories and, occasionally, the pathetic 
spirit of the mausoleums. The Dutch were much more con- 
cerned with painting than with sculpture, and some of the 
best carving in Holland was done by Belgians. The spirit 
of contemporary genre painting dared to intrude even by 
the side of the classic figures, and a homely but not very 
penetrating or powerful realism, perhaps even before it 
showed itself in painting, often appeared in the reliefs on 
buildings and in the sepulchral effigies. In the second half 
of the seventeenth century, here and there a tendency to 
adopt French classicism asserted itself. The tombs were 


400 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the most notable assemblies of sculpture, especially those 
of the great admirals, which were usually adorned with a 
relief of the battle in which each was killed and with 
emblems of maritime activity. In the most magnificent 
examples, the effigy of the deceased was set in the midst 
of a kind of stately temple, more or less richly embellished 
with statues and reliefs. 


FIG. 228—-VERHULST. PURCHASE OF BUTTER. CITY WEIGH HOUSE, LEYDEN. 
(COURTESY OF DR. JAN KALF) 


De Keyzer. The most important native Dutchman was 
Hendrik de-Keyzer (1565-1621). Uniting to his Italian- 
ism a certain degree of Dutch realism, he became an 
estimable exponent of the modest. virtues that we have 
allowed to Dutch sculpture. His great work is the temple- 
mausoleum of William the Silent in the Nieuwe Kerk, Delft, 
suggested perhaps by the tomb of Henry II in St. Denis. 
The decoration of public buildings with reliefs from every- 
day life is illustrated by the three panels from the House 
of Charity, Amsterdam, now in the Museum, probably to 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 401 


be ascribed rather to one of Hendrik’s sons, Willem and 
Pieter. 

Verhulst.. The other significant sculptural personality in 
the seventeenth century was a Belgian of Malines, Rom- 
bout Verhulst (1624-1698), who, having come as an assist- 
ant of Artus Quellin, remained in Holland. Like De Key- 
zer, however, he stood for a more naturalistic strain in the 
art of the Low Countries than the classical Quellin. This 
quality was immediately apparent in the colloquial reliefs 
that he did for the City Weigh House and Butter Mar- 
ket of Leyden, representing the testing of packed merchan- 
dise and the purchase of butter (Fig. 228). The rest of 
his production consisted of many sepulchral monuments and 
of several portrait busts. In both of these fields he evinced 
an endowment of technical skill, a sensitiveness to style, 
and an ability to impart life, that were unusual in Holland. 
In the modelling of the forms of the decorating putti he 
vied with the best masters of the century. His two master- 
pieces are the similar monuments of Willem van Lyere and 
of Karel van Inn-ende-Knyphuisen, the former in the church 
at Katwijk-Binnen, the latter in the church at Midwolde 
south of Groningen. 


VI. ENGLAND 


A. THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 


During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries sculp- 
ture in England recuperated somewhat from the decline 
into which it had fallen in the Renaissance, but the credit 
for the recovery was due almost wholly to Dutch prac- 
titioners or-to Englishmen who had been trained in Bel- 
gium and Holland. The prevalent style of the seventeenth 
century was similar to the Dutch adaptation of the dry, 
classic manner of the late’ Renaissance, enlivened spo- 
radically, especially in the second half of the century, by 
elements of the baroque. It found a typical exponent in 
Nicholas Stone (1586-1647), who had been trained at Am- 
sterdam under Hendrik de Keyzer. Although Inigo Jones 


402 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


employed him to carry out his architectural and sculptural 
conceptions, it is possible that Stone himself not only exe- 
cuted but actually designed the famous south porch of St. 
Mary the Virgin’s at Oxford with its twisted baroque col- 
umns and figures of the Virgin and angels. His produc- 
tion, however, was largely confined to tombs, in the effigies 
of which, almost inevitably, he betrayed himself a rather 
stiff and lifeless portraitist. One of the best known examples 
is the monument of Thomas 
Sutton in Charterhouse 
Chapel, London. The 
tombs of Sir George Holles 
and Francis Holles in 
Westminster Abbey em- 
phasize the antiquarian as- 
pect..of-~classtctsm. As 
Nicholas Stone labored for 
Inigo Jones, so Francis 
Bird (1667-1731) decorated 
the architecture of _ Sir 
Christopher Wren. His 
chief work on St. Paul’s 
cathedral, the Conversion 
of St. Paul that occupies 
the west. pediment, is thor- 
oughly baroque in move- 
FIG. 229—GIBBONS. PART OF pEcoRA- Ment, in dramatic postures, 
TION OF REREDOS, ST. JAMES, PICCA- and in pictorial setting of 
nae ae ls °F % buildings, clouds, and rays. 

A much less commonplace 
master than either Stone or Bird was Grinling Gibbons (1648- 
1721), chiefly remembered as a decorative sculptor in wood. 
He exemplified the general return of the seventeenth cen- 
tury to naturalism by the liveliness, faithfulness to actual- 
ity, and beauty with which he carved ornamentation of 
flowers, foliage, birds, and putt. (Fig. 229). But he also 
turned his hand successfully to other phases of the plastic 
art and stood forth as a representative of the more decidedly 
baroque fashion of England in the later seventeenth cen- 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 403 


tury. His marble font in St. James, Piccadilly, resembles 
the Belgian pulpits of the eighteenth century in its pictorial 
treatment. The Adam and Eve of this font and the Roman- 
ized statue of James II in St. James’s Park, London, prove 
that he was no mean figure-sculptor. 


B. THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 


Introductory. Even more commissions were now assigned 
to foreigners; but because these foreigners came principally 
from Belgium and France rather. than from Holland, the 
baroque of Italy and the rococo of France tended to sup- 
plant in England the enervated manner of the late Dutch 
Renaissance. The French type of dramatized tomb enjoyed 
special favor. In the second half of the century, the move- 
ment toward neoclassicism was scarcely less pronounced 
than in France. The most distinguished plastic productions 
of the English eighteenth century were perhaps the portrait 
busts. 

Foreign sculptors. Peter Scheemakers (1691-c. 1770) and 
John Michael Rysbrack (1693-1770), both from Antwerp and 
both employed chiefly on tombs of the contemporary Bel- 
~ gian and French types, imported a fresher style and a more 
skilful craftsmanship than had been achieved in the English 
work of the preceding century. These Flemings, as well as the 
English sculptors of the epoch, were eclipsed by the French- 
man Louis Frangois Roubillac (1695-1762), who displayed 
to the admiring eyes of the British the superior technique, 
ease, and élan of the French rococo. Popular as a builder 
of mausoleums, he created such masterly specimens of the 
elaborate French dramatic type as the monuments of the 
Duke of Argyll and of Lady Nightingale in Westminster 
Abbey. He perpetuated his memory also by several busts 
which vie with the best French specimens of the time and 
possess much more dash, style, and sense of personal beauty 
than any English sculptor was able to attain. The Handel 
and the Hogarth of the National Portrait Gallery are good 
examples. 


404 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Native sculptors. The only prominent native sculptors 
were active in the second half of the century, and all, to a 
greater or less extent, were forerunners of neoclassicism. The 
most distinguished English executer of mortuary commissions 
was John Bacon the Elder (1740-1799). The monument to 
the first Pitt in Westminster is the best instance of the pre- 
tentious allegory and rhetorical patriotism that he affected. 
The most flourishing business in busts was plied by Joseph 
Nollekens (1737-1823), whose fame rests upon many such 
excellent but  unsparing 
characterizations as the 
portraits of Fox and the 
younger Pitt in the Na- 
tional Portrait Gallery. 
The sometimes incorrect 
and always uninteresting 
style of Joseph _Wilton — 
(1722-1803) would not de- 
serve mention at all in this 
book, if he had not had a 
certain connection with 
America. In Westminster, 
his tomb of General Wolfe, 
on which an angel rewards 
the dying hero, has the 

cluttered detail and ‘“fussi- 
FIG. 230—WILTON. TOMB OF eae ness” of the rococo (Fig. 
WOU, esl a er ABBEY. (PHOTO. 230). “He also accutane 

first three sculptural monu- 
ments erected in this country: to the elder Pitt at Charleston 
and in Wall St., New York, and to George III on Bowling 
Green in the latter city. The Romanized equestrian George 
III and the Pitt at New York perished during the Revolu- 
tion, except for the fragments gathered in the New York 
Historical Society. The Pitt at Charleston, slightly mu- 
tilated, has been set up once more; the antique draperies 
treated with rococo elaboration bear witness to the con- 
flicting tendencies in Wilton’s style. 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 405 


VII. GerMANY 


A. THE SEVENTEENTH CEN- 
TURY 


The devastation wrought 
by the Thirty Years’ War 
(1618-1648) tended to re- 
duce the_ plastic output, 
especially in the Protestant 
sections of the country, and 
it was instrumental also in 
preventing the appearance 
of any German sculptors of 
the first rank. During the 
first half of the seventeenth 
century the style of the 
late Belgian and Dutch 
Renaissance that lingered 
on in Germany developed 
of itself into a kind of ba- 
roque without any influence 
from Italy. Though tend- 
ing to multiplication of 
small detail and lacking the 
largeness and monumental- 
ity of the contemporary 
Italian style, this early 
German baroque has the 
characteristic qualities of 
pictorialism, agitation, ca- 
priciousness, opulence, and 
greater naturalism. A typ- 
ical exponent of the move- 
ment in the north was Lud- 
wig Miunsterman of Olden- 
Durer ta, c. 1639); one of 
the principal names in the 
south was that of Hans 


oot 


FIG. 231—DEGLER. ALTAR. CHURCH OF 
ST. ULRICH AND ST. AFRA, AUGSBURG, 
(PHOTO. DR. FR. STOEDTNER) 


406 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Degler (d. 1637), who belonged to a group of Bavarian 
sculptors in wood (Fig. 231). The invasion of artists from 
the Low Countries still continued, though in less force. 
They conquered a position especially at the court of the 
Great Elector of Brandenburg, Frederick William, who now 
raised Prussia into a centre for northern German art. 


B. THE LATER SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES 


Introductory. It was not until the latter part of the seven- 
teenth century that the influence of Italian developments was 
superimposed upon the native tendencies towards the baroque. 
In northern Germany, it was rather the Belgian and Dutch 
aspects of the Italian baroque that still played the pre- 
ponderant role. In the south, the relationships with Italy 
were more direct. Many distinguished native masters joined 
with the constantly present foreigners in the development 
from the baroque to the utmost centrifugal license of the 
rococo and to neoclassicism. The cultural ascendancy of 
France during the epoch expressed itself in the frequent 
patronage given to French masters, in the imitation of the 
French form of the rococo, particularly for secular and 
sepulchral sculpture, and in the occasional adoption even of 
the classicism of Louis XIV: 

Schluter. In the first generation of native masters, the 
name of Andreas Schliiter (1664-1714) is most familiar. 
Educated in Italy and among the Flemings and Dutchmen 
then enjoying favor in northern Germany, he became the 
architect and sculptor of the Hohenzollern at Berlin. His 
style is baroque, but his Teutonism asserted itself in greater 
realism and in the Herculean strength of his figures. He 
possessed also a true sense of monumentality that was usually 
denied to baroque artists. Now and again, he shows a de- 
pendence upon the classicists of France. One of the land- 
marks of Berlin is his bronze equestrian statue of the Great 
Elector on the Long Bridge (Fig. 232), infused with a tre- 
mendous and essentially German energy. The rider and horse 
seem to have been suggested by Girardon’s non-extant eques- 
trian monument of Louis XIV, which was then being made 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 407 


but had not yet been unveiled. The realistic side to Schliiter’s 
personality is uppermost, in a ghastly phase, in the colossal 
masks of expiring warriors adorning the arches of the court 
in the Arsenal. The virtues of the series are the technical 
skill, the inventive range in age, mood, and kind of agony, 
and the heroic vigor that gives the heads the required monu- 


FIG. 232—SCHLUTER. MONUMENT OF THE GREAT ELECTOR. BERLIN: 
(PHOTO. PHOTOGRAPHISCHE GESELLSCHAFT, BERLIN) 


mentality. The most celebrated example of his religious 
work is the pulpit in the Marien-Kirche, an instance of the 
baroque magnificence which was bestowed upon these objects 
by the Germans and especially the Saxons as early as the 
end of the seventeenth century and which was only less than 
that in which the Flemings revelled. The lower part is de- 
rived from Bernini’s structure for St. Peter’s Chair. The 
two allegorical and dramatic bronze tombs in the cathedral 


408 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


of Berlin that he executed for King Frederick I and his 
Queen are free adaptations of Girardon’s monument for 
Richelieu. 

Other native masters. The first important native manipu- 
lator of the baroque was Balthasar Permoser (1651-1732), ac- 
tive principally at Dresden. He embodied the baroque in its 
most pronounced form, whether his works are viewed from 
the standpoint of pictorial accessories or of violent agitation; 
but he managed to invest his feminine figures with great 
charm. His chief productions, mythological and allegorical, 
decorate the palace of the Zwinger at Dresden. His best 
known religious work is the pulpit of the Court Church, 
adorned with the soaring Evangelists and flights of puttz 
holding the instruments of the Passion. By entangling his 
statue of Prince Eugene of Savoy (in the Belvedere, Vienna) 
in an intricate mesh of symbolical figures, he created one of 
the extreme manifestations of the baroque spirit. Like so 
many sculptors of the epoch, he did not feel it beneath him to 
busy himself with the minor arts, especially ivories. In south- 
ern Germany Johann Peter Alexander Wagner (1730-1809) 
occupied as important a position at the episcopal court of 
Wiirzburg as Schliiter at Berlin or Permoser at Dresden. His 
lot, however, was cast in the days when the rococo had taken 
the place of the baroque, and he even began to walk timidly 
over the road to neoclassicism. His ability may be meas- 
ured by the statuary and vases on the staircase of the 
Episcopal Palace at Witrzburg and by -his sculptured em- 
bellishment of the gardens of the castle at Veitshéchheim. 
His puttz, which constitute his chief claim to renown, are 
modelled in the naturalistic fashion set by Duquesnoy. 


VIII. Austria 


Donner. The greatest Austrian sculptor of the epoch 
was Georg Raphael Donner (1693-1741). He had a baroque 
foundation, but he soon became a prophet of neoclassicism. 
He was endowed with high technical skill and with a respect 
for ideal and noble beauty of person unusual at the period. 
His principal medium was lead... His more baroque phase 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 409 


may be illustrated by such superior and spirited examples 
of the style as the mounted St. Martin and the beggar in 
the cathedral, Pressburg, and (from the same altar) two 
angels in the National Museum, Budapest. His masterpiece 
is the Fountain in the New Market, Vienna (Fig. 233). 
Bronze copies have now been substituted for the original lead 
figures, which have been 
removed to the Staédt- 
isches Depot. The 
achievement represents 
the most beautiful expres- 
sion of that happy mo- 
ment when incipient neo- 
classicism was not yet be- 
clouded by too much 
archeology but still il- 
lumined by the brilliancy 
and originality of the ba- 
roque. Donner’s statue of 
Charles VI in the Belve- 
dere, Vienna, though ac- 
companied by a fluttering 
feminine _ personification, 
is quieter and less dis- 
turbed by centrifugal ef- 
fects than Permoser’s Eu- 


gene. 
Other sculpture of the 
period. The Austrian "I 233—DONNER. FIGURES (BRONZE) 


ON FOUNTAIN. 


“Trinity Columns,” erect- 
ed usually as thank-offer- 
ings for deliverance from 
the plague, constitute as 


NEW MARKET, VIENNA. 
(FROM DEHIO AND VON BEZOLD, “DIE 
DENKMALER DER DEUTSCHEN  BILD- 
HAUERKUNST ’) 


extreme manifestations of the 


baroque feeling as the pulpits of Belgium. The specimen in 
the Graben at Vienna, due to the collaboration of several 
sculptors, exhibits a multiplicity of figures ensconced on high- 
heaped, pictorial accessories of rocks and clouds. The most 
eminent exponent, at Vienna, of the naturalism of the rococo 
in portraiture was the Swabian, Franz Xaver Messerschmidt 


410 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


(1732-1783), who has been called the Hogarth of sculpture. 
A good example of his unconditioned characterization is the 
bust of Van Swieten in the Public Hospital, Vienna. His 
interest in the studies of Mesmer and of the physiognomist, 
Lavater, led him to execute his even more startling series of 
heads of eccentric characters, represented at moments of 
physical and psychic excitement. 


IX. SPAIN 
A. THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY 


Introductory. In this, its Golden Age, Spanish art owed 
less to the Renaissance than did the contemporary output of 
other peoples. It retained certain things that it had learned 
from the antique and from Italianism, such as classically 
beautiful dispositions of the drapery; but in general it shook 
off all imitation, reasserted its originality, and became more 
truly national even than in the Middle Ages. Spanish sculp- 
tors did not continue to study in Italy hke the masters of 
other countries, and they were therefore much less under 
the spell of Bernini and his entourage. The plastic production 
of Spain during this period was almost exclusively religious. 
The enthusiastic Catholicism of the country, which was the 
great stronghold of the Counter-Reformation, bestowed a 
more than usual fervor of Jesuitical piety upon the statuary, 
but the fervor expressed itself in an inner emotional intensity 
rather than in the usual outward agitation of the baroque. 
The gravity of the Spanish temperament avoided the Italian 
riots of movement, although the separate statues of saints 
were usually represented in some form of not too violent 
activity. The Spanish masters departed from the usual 
standard of the baroque also by indulging less in pictorial 
effects. They showed little fondness for the great pictorial 
compositions of architecture and statuary to which Bernini 
was addicted, and preferred single figures. The naturalism 
which has been typical of the whole history of Spanish art 
now appeared in its most decided manifestation, approach- 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 411 


ing close to verism.t The old Spanish medium of wood 
was almost universally retained. The polychromy was often 
executed, not by the carvers themselves, but by painters, and 
one of the expressions of naturalism was the greater faithful- 
ness of the color scheme to actuality. In general quality the 
sculpture of this period was only less distinguished than the 
more famous painting of Velazquez, Ribera, Zurbaran, and 
Murillo. 


FIG. 234—GREGORIO FERNANDEZ. PIETA. MUSEUM, VALLADOLID. (PHOTO 
LACOSTE ) 


The School of Valladolid. The master who led the way in 
the repudiation of the Italian Renaissance and in the resusci- 
tation of the indigenous tradition was Gregorio Fernandez 
(or Hernandez) (c. 1567-1636). He retained enough of the 
tutelage of the Renaissance to invest his naturalism with a 
certain elegance of posture and drapery, particularly in his 
retables, as in that of the cathedral of Plasencia; but discard- 


ing the premature baroque violence of Berruguete and Juan 


*Cf. below, p. 476. 


412 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


de Juni, he reasserted the spirit of Spanish gravity. His 
Virgin of Sorrows in the church of Santa Cruz at Valladolid 
demonstrates how emotional piety expressed itself in Spain in 
concentrated intensity and a veristic approximation to reality 
rather than in baroque gesticulation. His naturalism mani- 
fested itself especially in his utterly faithful and unclassical 
treatment of the nude, as in 
his many effigies of the 
dead Christ, which exhibit 
an almost poignant feeling 
for the beauty and softness 
of the flesh and the lines 
of the undraped body. He 
was also the champion of 
the reaction against the 
vivid polychromy that, had 
reached its climax in Juan 
de Juni. The various as- 
pects of his achievement 
are well illustrated by the 
Baptism of Christ and the 
Pieta (Fig. 234) in the Mu- 
seum of Valladolid. 

The School of the South. 
At Seville, the southern fo- 
cus of Spanish art during 
this period, the outstanding 
name in sculpture is that 
of Juan Martinez Mon- 
tanés (c. 1564-1649). He 
gives the same curious im- 
pression of a combined 
idealism and naturalism that is the distinctive mark of Mu- 
rillo’s maturity, and like Murillo, he best embodied this 
style in the subject of the Immaculately Conceived Virgin. 
Of several repetitions, perhaps the greatest is the example 
in the church of the Sagrario, annexed to the cathedral at 
Seville. Montanhés sublimated his naturalism also by be- 
stowing monumentality upon his figures, especially, like 


FIG. 235—-MONTANES. VIRGIN. MU- 
SEUM, SEVILLE. (PHOTO. LACOSTE) 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 413 


FIG. 236—PEDRO DE MENA. VIRGIN AND CHILD. STO. DOMINGO, MALAGA. 
(COURTESY OF THE JUNTA DE AMPLIFICACION DE ESTUDIOS, MADRID) 


Benedetto da Maiano, through the device of great sweeps 
of enveloping drapery (Fig. 235). A comparative restraint 
in religious expression made for the same end. Even over 
the celebrated Crucifix of the cathedral there rests that 
calm sobriety which ensured to Montanés greater success 


414 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


in single figures than in animated compositions. The 
painter and sculptor Alonso Cano of Granada (1601- 
1667) was influenced in his plastic production by Montafiés. 
Though he did not hold his pious passion so firmly 
in check as the Sevillan master, he aimed at a more ideal- 
ized beauty than his rivals, and, choosing gentler forms, 
he treated their details with a technical delicacy that, as in his 
paintings, distantly recalls Florentine art of the Quattrocento. 
Characteristic examples of his style at Granada are the Mag- 
dalene in the Cartuja and the Immaculate Conception in 
the sacristy of the cathedral. The most interesting, if not 
the greatest, Spanish sculptor of the century was Cano’s 
pupil, Pedro de Mena of Granada (1628-1688). During the 
arlier part of his~career, which is best represented by 
the carving of the choir-stalls in the cathedral of Malaga; 
the naturalistic side of his genius was dominant; and yet the 
idealistic inheritance from Cano somewhat tempered his 
anatomical zeal and made his nudes the most beautiful ex- 
amples produced by Spanish sculptors at this epoch. The 
moderated naturalism of the tondo of the Virgin and Child in 
sto. Domingo, Malaga, one of the most winning pieces of all 
Spanish sculpture (Fig. 236), again demonstrates the partial 
persistence of Cano’s influence, and, like his master’s work, 
suggests Florentine art of the fifteenth century. His puttz, 
also, continue the best traditions for the modelling of the 
forms of children. In his maturity he added to his gifts 
spiritual expressiveness. The St. Francis in the cathedral of 
Toledo proves that Mena embodied his pious ardor best in 
the forms of ascetics, and that in the representation of monks 
and friars he has few rivals in the world’s history. 


B. THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY, 


The sculptors of Spain in this period may be divided into 
four groups. There were, first, those who betrayed an un- 
mistakable decadence from the high standards of the pre- 
ceding century. The decadence often manifested itself in 
an adoption and even exaggeration of the baroque of Italy 
in its most wanton forms. This style appeared principally 
in architectural decoration and is called Churrigueresque 


THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 415 


from the man who, rightly or wrongly, has been reckoned its 
most outrageous exponent, José Churriguera. Never has 
ornamentation been so overladen, so ostentatious, and so ugly 
in detail. A notorious example is Narciso Tomé’s embellish- 
ment of the screen behind the high altar of the cathedral of 
Toledo, called the Trasparente because of the opening that 
admits light from the ambulatory. The taste was as bad in 
separate statues of saints. The mere artisans who now 
largely monopolized the plastic market broke all bonds in 
their naturalism, delighting in horror and putrefaction and 
endowing the figures with real hair and nails, glass eyes, 
and apparatus for moving the several parts of the body. A 
second group was constituted by the few sculptors who man- 
aged to maintain to a certain degree the good old traditions 
of the seventeenth century. Chief among these was Francisco 
Salzillo or Zarerlo of Murcia (1707-1781). The workshop 
that he organized with his brothers and sister is principally 
remembered for its pasos or sets of figures representing epi- 
sodes from the Passion to be carried in the processions of 
Holy Week. The most notable examples are in the Ermita de 
Jesus at Murcia. Such essentially Spanish subjects, which 
had exercised the skill of great artists at least as early as 
Gregorio Fernandez, were treated with a pronounced natural- 
ism that sought to give the illusion of actual scenes; but 
Salzillo was never guilty of the realistic aberrations of the 
majority of his contemporaries. He sometimes conformed, 
however, to the now established practice of avoiding the labor 
of modelling anything but the head and extremities by con- 
cealing the rest with a real garment. A third group was 
formed by the French sculptors imported by Philip V, the 
first of the French Bourbon dynasty, to adorn the gardens 
of the palace of La Granja which he began in 1719 at San 
Ildefonso in direct imitation of Versailles. To a fourth 
group may be assigned the members of the Academy of San 
Fernando founded in 1752 and those inspired by the reform 
' that the Academy was created to champion. Ferdinand VI’s 
purpose was to rescue Spanish art from the degradation into 
which it had sunk, but the effort was only partially successful. 
The Academy banished extravagances, to be sure, but it 


416 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


produced no better masters than Fehpe de Castro (1711- 
1775) to direct and give strength to its energies. The chief 
element in the resulting style, despite a frequent admixture 
of naturalistic and baroque tendencies, was French classicism, 
much affected by the closer study of the antique that was 
general in Europe during the second half of the eighteenth 
century. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


The revived interest in the baroque has finally produced an 
adequate book on the European sculpture of the period in A. E. 
Brinckmann’s Barockskulptur, Berlin, 1919, notable alike for 
its complete, up-to-date information and for its enlightened 
criticism; at the end even a brief résumé of the eighteenth cen- 
tury is included. One of the most active and capable modern 
investigators of the Italian baroque is A. Mufioz, among whose 
articles on the subject may be mentioned La scultura barocca e 
Vantico, L’Arte, XIX (1916), pp. 129-160, and La scultura 
barocca, Rassegna d’arte, July, 1916, pp. 158-168. The most com- 
prehensive monograph on Bernini is by S. Fraschetti, Milan, 
1900; M. Reymond’s (Paris) and M. von Boehn’s (Leipzig) books 
of 1911 and 1912 respectively should also be consulted; in 
Bernini and Other Studies, New York, 1914, R. Norton indulges 
in a dithyrambie rehabilitation of the baroque and its chief 
exponent. Algardi is thoroughly treated by H. Posse in the 
Jahrbuch der preussischen Kunstsammlungen, XXVI (1905), 
pp. 169-201. Bracci is the subject of volumes by K. von Domarus, 
Strassburg, 1915, and by C. Gradara, Milan, 1920. 

The general spirit of French classic art is set forth with Gallic 
lucidity and elegance in H. Lemonnier’s two works, L’art 
francais au temps de Richelieu et de Mazarin, Paris, 1893, and 
L’art francais au temps de Louis XIV, Paris, 1911. F. Inger- 
soll-Smouse’s book, La sculpture funéraire en France au X VIII 
siecle, Paris, 1912, covers more than the title implies: it is a 
clear and penetrating examination of the evolution of the French 
tomb in the classic as well as the rococo period. Monographs on 
individual artists are furnished by: H. Stein, Les fréres Anguiter, 
Paris, 1889; H. Jouin, Paris, 1883, and G. Keller-Dorian, Paris 
and Lyons, 1920, both on Coysevox; P. Auquier, Pierre Puget, 
Paris, 1903; and Lady Dilke (E. F. Strong), Les Coustou, 
Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1901, I, pp. 5-14 and 208-214. Lady 


- THE BAROQUE AND THE ROCOCO 417 


Dilke has also written a pleasant, anecdotal book on the rococo 
in French Architects and Sculptors of the XVIIIth Century, 
London, 1900. The following are the standard monographs for 
the French eighteenth century: A. Roserot, Hdme Bouchardon, 
Paris, 1910; S. Rocheblave, Jean Baptiste Pigalle, Paris, 
1919; Louis Réau, H. M. Falconet, Paris, 1922; J. Guiffrey, 
Les Caffiéri, Paris, 1877; H. Stein, Augustin Pajou, Paris, 1912; 
H. Thirion, Les Adam et Clodion, Paris, 1885, and J. Guiffrey, 
Le sculpteur Claude Michel dit Clodion, Gazette des Beaux Arts, 
1892, II, pp.. 478-495, and 1893, I, pp. 164-176 and 392-417; and 
on Houdon, C. H. Hart and E. Biddle, Philadelphia, 1911, and, 
more comprehensive and final, with an elaborate catalogue of 
his works, G. Giacometti, Paris, 1918-1919, in three volumes. 

A summary but useful book on the Belgian baroque is H. Rous- 
seau’s La sculpture aux xvii® et xviii’ siécles, Brussels, 1911. 
Laurent Delvaux is studied by G. Willame in a book published 
at Brussels in 1914. The greatest sculptor active in Holland 
during the epoch is well treated by M. van Notten in Rombout 
Verhulst, The Hague, 1908. E. B. Chancellor’s Lives of the 
British Sculptors, London, 1911, though undiscriminating as well 
as too discursive and biographical, contains valuable data on the 
production of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. For 
monographs on English sculpture of the period, the student is 
referred to: A. E. Bullock, Some Sculptural Works of Nicholas 
Stone, London, 1908, and Grinling Gibbons and his Compeers, 
London, 1914; and to L. Rosenthal, Un sculpteur francais en 
Angleterre au xviit® siecle, Roubillac, Revue dhistoire moderne 
et contemporaine, I (1899-1900), pp. 593-605. Further reading on 
German and Austrian sculpture may be found in: C. Gurlitt, 
Andreas Schliter, Berlin, 1891; H. G. Lempertz, Johann Peter 
Alexander Wagner, Cologne, 1904; and KE. Tuietze-Conrat, 
Oesterreichische Barockplastik, Vienna, 1920. R. de Orueta has 
contributed splendid studies to the Spanish baroque in his La 
vida y la obra de Pedro de Mena, Madrid, 1914, and in his 
Gregorio Hernandez, Madrid, 1920. 


GHAPTER XI 
NEOCLASSICISM 
I. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS 


The cardinal principle of neoclassicism, which dominated 
all of Europe during the last few years of the eighteenth and 
the first. quarter.of.the nineteenth century, was the imitation 
of the masterpieces of classic antiquity. The tendencies were 
brought to a head in no small degree by the propaganda of 
the German savant Winckelmann and the German painter 
Anton Raphael Mengs; but the movement may be viewed 
also as a spontaneous reaction-against the extravagancies of 
the baroque and-rococo., Almost any sculptor of the period 
would probably have proclaimed a formal allegiance to 
nature, but only in so far as her multifarious aspects might 
be verified in ancient statues; and the practical consequence 
was that he was satisfied to learn no more of actuality than 
what he found in these prototypes. The-imitation was much 
more absolute even than in the Cinquecento. Since at first 
the productions of the best ancient periods were not known, 
the works of the pupils of Praxiteles and of the Hellenistic 
epoch were taken as the supreme models, with the result that 
charm and grace, softness, and sometimes even sensuality 
became the great desiderata. Although the sculptures of the 
Parthenon and the Avginetan temple were revealed to Europe 
at the beginning of the nineteenth century, they really had 
very little influence. Thorvaldsen and other later neoclassi- 
cists flattered themselves that they had attained a more es- 
sentially Greek manner than Canova and the earlier 
generation, dignifying it with the name of Hellenism; but as 
a matter of fact the whole output of neoclassicism was very 
much the same. Like all imitators, the neoclassicist exag- 

418 


NEOCLASSICISM 419 


gerated the traits of his prototypes, omitting the modelling, 
for instance, as far as possible in his effort after the idealized 
and generalized beauty of antiquity. The aims that he set 
himself were Hellenic repose of body, classic impassivity of 
countenance, and simplicity of composition; but occasionally, 
in a last homage to the baroque or in a frantic effort to 
break the cold spell of the neoclassic style, he dared to in- 
dulge in extravagant gesticulation, all the more obvious and 
painful because unfitted to the forms that he had borrowed 
from the past. Pictorial perspective was banished from re- 
liefs. The Christian subjects were deemed less capable of 
the highest artistic expression than those of classical 
mythology and history. By the strictest theorists, portraits 
were tabooed; but patronage demanded them, and their 
executers salved their consciences by generalizing the fea- 
tures, by approximating them to those of some Greek or 
Roman figure, and by clothing the forms in ancient costume 
or ancient nudity or at least by somewhat concealing con- 
temporary dress in a classically draped mantle. All themes 
were oppressed by rhetorical sentimentality. Yet even neo- 
classicism had its virtues, and one of them was a partial 
recovery of the sculptural sense in distinction from baroque 
pictorialism. 


II, Ivraty 


Canova. The first great exponent of the style in sculpture 
was an Italian, Antonio Canova (1757-1822), born at Pos- 
sagno in the province of Treviso but active chiefly at Rome. 
He tinged the neoclassic manner with other characteristics, 
but he also exemplified its typical features. The close de- 
pendence of the Perseus,-in the Vatican, upon the Apollo 
Belvedere (cf. Fig. 71) reveals how sometimes he indulged 
in an almost exact reproduction of antiques. At other times 
the relation, though indubitable, is not so tangible: for in- 
stance, the group of Cupid and Psyche, in the Louvre, seems 
to have been suggested by a painting of a faun and a nymph 
from Herculaneum. The conception of Pauline Bonaparte 
(Fig. 237) as a Venus Victrix may serve as an example of 


420 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


his adaptation of portraits to classic figures. He embodies 
likewise the neoclassic standards of Praxitelean grace and 
softness. One of the reasons was that these qualities were 
attuned to his own personality, and there is, indeed, a more 
subjective note in Canova’s sculpture than in the average 
output of the movement. He possessed a sense of physical 
beauty, the inalienable heritage of his race, which even the 
tyranny of neoclassicism could not utterly dull. In a word, 


FIG. 237—-CANOVA. PAULINE BONAPARTE. VILLA BORGHESE, ROME 


his works have more warmth than those of his rivals. The 
elegance and sweetness of many of his productions are linger- 
ing echoes of the rococo. Another phase of his personality 
is exhibited by the Hercules and Lichas in the National 
Gallery of Modern Art at Rome, one of his occasional and 
successful attempts to reproduce the colossal and forceful as- 
pects of the antique. Here, as in some other instances, the 
baroque sense was still potent enough to make him choose 
the passing moment for representation. Nor could he be quite 


NEOCLASSICISM 421 


so oblivious to nature as the severest theorists required. The 
best proof is afforded by some of his portraits, such as the 
Letitia Bonaparte at Chatsworth, England. The contem- 
porary tendencies to simplification, placidity, allegory, and 
sentiment are well illustrated by his series of mortuary-monu- 
ments. In the two tombs of Clement XIV and Clement XIII, 
the former in the church of the SS. Apostoli, the latter in St. 
Peter’s, Rome, he reduced the baroque type of sepulchre to 
greater tranquillity. His most pretentious mausoleum, the 
monument. of the Archduchess Maria Christina in the 
Augustinian Church, Vienna, is a subdued example of the 
French dramatic tomb of the eighteenth century. 


Ill. DENMARK 


The boasted Hellenism of Bertel Thorvaldsen of Copen- 
hagen (1770-1844) manifested itself chiefly only in a greater 
profusion of Greek subjects and in an affectation of greater 
archeological correctness and detail. Having established 
himself at Rome, he developed into an absolute slave of the 
antique. It was a foregone conclusion that his respect for 
nature would be reduced to the minimum. One misses in his 
sculpture the impress of personality that Canova managed to 
retain. When unassisted by the ideas of others and when 
not reproducing antique conceptions, he was simple and un- 
imaginative almost to the point of stupidity, nor did he com- 
pensate by any emotional qualities. It is all very well to say 
that he purposed this simplicity and this suppression of pas- 
sion as incongruous with the tranquillity of the antique; but 
had he not been very phlegmatic in temperament, he would 
surely have chafed under neoclassic restrictions and at times 
and to a certain extent he would have shaken off these fetters. 
He was even technically less fine than Canova. The prin- 
cipal esthetic quality with which he was concerned was prob- 
ably composition, and here he was almost always good. His 
constant dependence upon the antique it hardly seems neces- 
sary to demonstrate. One or two examples will serve the 
purpose. Like the Perseus of Canova, his Jason is merely 
a transcript of the Apollo Belvedere. In the frieze of Alex- 
ander’s triumph, existing in the plaster model in its original 


422 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


position in the Quirinal Palace, Rome, and in finished marble, 
with some modifications, in the Villa Carlotta on Lake Como, 
the horsemen are suggested by the Parthenon frieze and the 
Asiatics by the barbarians on Trajan’s column. Like Canova 
he was more at home in the gently elegant than in the heroic, 
and for this reason perhaps he preferred relief to statues in 
the round. But even in his best works in this manner, such 
as the renowned allegorical tondos of Morning and Night 
(Fig. 238), he did not approach so close to Praxitelean grace 
as his Italian rival. The nearest thut he ever got to natural- 
ism was in three of his four 
tondos of the Seasons, the 
rather charming Spring re- 
maining antique in concep- 
tion. His portraits he was 
hkely to translate com- 
pletely into ancient terms, 
until little suggestion of the 
individual was left. The 
Count Potocki in the ca- 
thedral of Cracow, for in- 
stance, is a highly idealized 
classical warrior. His best 
portrait is perhaps the 
seated effigy of Pius VII on 
FIG. 238—THORVALDSEN. NIGHT. the tomb in St. Peter's, a 
VILLA ALBANI, ROME monument of the more 
tranquil type employed by 
Canova. In the latter part of his life, he was-forced to sac- 
rifice his principles somewhat and do homage to the Ro- 
mantic movement; but with his lack of any historic sense, he 
was here out of his element, and even in the best of his 
statues in romantic costume, such as the equestrian Maxi- 
milian I in the Wittelsbacher-Platz, Munich, he was able 
to attain no incisiveness or force. . 


IV. FRANCE oF 
Neoclassicism was peculiarly fostered in France by the 
Revolutionary ideals of ancient republics and by Napoleon’s 


NEOCLASSICISM 423 


visions of a Roman empire. The artistic dictatorship that 
in the past had been enjoyed by such men as Le Brun and 
Boucher was now wielded by the painter, Louis David, who 
exercised his confirmed antiquarian influence in sculpture 
as well as in his own sphere. Since the ancient borrowings, 
however, were colored with an unmistakable ‘“Frenchiness,”’ 
they were never so absolute as those of Canova and Thor- 
valdsen. One group of sculptors cultivated the Praxitelean 
grace exhibited by Antoine Denis Chaudet (1763-1810) in 
his kneeling Eros with a 
butterfly (Fig. 239). Pierre 
Cartellier (1757-1831) may 
‘be taken as representative 
of another, more_ austere 
coterie, who found success 
in the decoration of archi- 
tecture and in other monu- 
mental undertakings. Bas- 
ing himself upon an ancient 
coin or gem, for instance, 
he executed a rather im- 
pressive relief in his Tri- 
umphal Quadriga over the 
central door of the Colon- 
nade in the east facade of 
the Louvre. Less _hide- 
bound than the majority of FIG. 239—CHAUDET. EROS. LOUVRE, 
neoclassicists, he revealed PARIS. (PHOTO. BRAUN) 

in his statue of Vergniaud 

at Versailles qualities of portraiture that even his archzologi- 
cal enthusiasm and the antique costume could not completely 
nullify. Certain sculptors ventured a somewhat more de- 
cided rebellion, daring, in some degree, to study nature and 
to bestow at least a modicum of warmth upon their crea- 
tions. Joseph Chinard of Lyons (1756-1813), in the soft 
outlines of his favorite terracotta, preserved much of the 
light and graceful charm of the rococo. His Three Graces 
in the Museum, Lyons, are a typical instance of the dainty 
and fanciful mode in which the eighteenth century treated 


424 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


mythological themes. His fame rests upon his delicate 
busts of young women (Fig. 240). Although he sometimes 

so far catered to existing 
oe » standards as to garb them 
- in classical costume, he vio- 
lated the neoclassic_ theo- 
ries by making them real 
portraits, and perhaps more 
than anyone else in the 
period he invested them 
with French sensibility to 
feminine charm. 


V. GERMANY AND AUSTRIA 


The naturalistic tradi- 
tion was too inbred in Ger- 
man art ever to be so far 
eradicated by neoclassicism 
FIG. 240—cHINARD. MME. RECAMIER. 8 It was in other countries. 

(PHOTO. GIRAUDON) Dannecker. The transi- 

tion from the rococo to neo- 

classicism was embodied in Johann Heinrich Dannecker of 
Stuttgart (1758-1841). The charming Sappho of the Stutt- 
gart Museum illustrates how his rococo education left a pleas- 
ant aftermath through all his earlier production both in his 
preference for subjects allowing him to treat the feminine 
figure and in his predilection for somewhat slighter and more 
graceful forms than those cultivated by the more heroic - 
among the neoclassicists. As he grew more neoclassic, al- 
though definite ancient prototypes for his works may occa- 
sionally be found, the effect of classical art upon him may 
be sought in fused impressions of several antiques or, even 
less specifically, in original imitations of the ancient manner. 
So it is rather the spirit of the antique that breathes through 
his Girl with a Bird, probably suggested by Catullus’s poem 
on Lesbia and the dead sparrow (Fig. 241). His most re- 
nowned achievement is the Ariadne in Bethmann’s Museum, 


5 


NEOCLASSICISM 425 


Frankfort. The enduring significance of Dannecker consists 
in the pleasing union of a moderate naturalism with the an- 
cient principles of rhythm 
and harmony. The best. 
instances of naturalism, 
are, as usual, the portrait 
busts. He was _ particu- 
larly the portraitist of 
Schiller. Of several exam- 
ples, the earliest, in the 
Library at Weimar, is the 
most memorable, despite 
the fact that the hair is 
treated with antique con- 
ventionalism. 

Schadow. The greatest 
German sculptor of the 
neoclassic period was Jo- 
hann Gottfried Schadow of 
Berlin (1764-1850). It is 
necessary to describe Scha- FIG. 241—DANNECKER. GIRL WITH 
dow as “of the neoclassic grep. MUSEUM, STUTTGART. (COUR- 
period,’ and not as essen- TESY OF MUSEUM, STUTTGART) 
tially neoclassic himself, 
since, although inevitably influenced by the rococo style cf 
his youth and by the prevalent antiquarianism, he was inde- 
pendent of any movement, and recognized as his guides only 
nature and his own conceptions. If he must be assigned to 
some tendency, his naturalism would be more in harmony 
with the rococo. He approached closest to the neoclassic in 
his decoration of the Brandenburg Gate, Berlin, and in his 
last work in marble, the recumbent maiden in the National 
Gallery, Berlin. Perhaps the most striking instances of his 
realism, all with contemporary military uniforms, are the 
statues of Frederick the Great in the Provinzial-Landhaus, 
Stettin, and of the generals Ziethen and Von Dessau in the 
Kaiser Friedrich Museum. His most popular work is the 
standing portrait group of the two sisters, the princesses 
Louise and Friederike of Prussia, in the Palace at Berlin 


426 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


(Fig. 242). In a greater degree than Dannecker, he has 
attained an agreeable fusion of naturalism, of rococo love- 
liness, and of that classic 
grace which was much as- 
sisted by the similarity of 
the fashionable Empire 
costume to the dress of an- 
cient Rome. 


VI. ENGLAND 


The English sculptors of 
this period sought to atone 
for a kind of provincial 
dullness and for the general _ 
coldness of the neoclassic 
style by a more liberal re- 
sort to rhetoric than even 
their continental rivals al- 
lowed themselves. The first 
important neoclassicist-was 
John Flaxman (1755-1826), 
who was much more dis- 
tinguished in his draw- 
FIG. 242 — SCHADOW. PRINCESSES a than in sculpture. He 
LOUISE AND FRIEDERIKE. Roya pAL- himself never learned how 
ACE, BERLIN. (PHOTO. PHOTOGRAPH- to handle marble success- 
ISCHE GESELLSCHAFT, BERLIN ) fully, and usually modelled 

or designed for others to ex- 
ecute, setting little value on careful finish. His private sep- 
ulchres have the strained sentiment of the epoch. In these 
he was accustomed to give concrete form to some Biblical 
text, and in general he was characterized by more religious 
interest than the average English neoclassicist. His well- 
known Michael overcoming Satan at Petworth House is curi- 
ously baroque in spirit. His monuments of Nelson in St. 
Paul’s, London (Fig. 243), and of Lord Mansfield in the 
Abbey are mild examples of the pompous and sentimental 
allegory relished by the British of that time in public com- 


NEOCLASSICISM 427 


memorations. The best known immediate successor of Flax- 
man was Sir Francis Chantrey (1781-1841). If he had been 
a greater artist, he might 
have become an English 
Schadow, for he was more 
at home in realistic sub- 
jects, such as_ portraits, 
than in imaginative themes 
or sepulchral monuments. 
As a sculptor of busts, he 
was the most sought after 
master of the day, but it is 
doubtful whether his like- 
nesses are any better than 
those by: Flaxman. The 
bust. of Scott in the Na- 
tional Portrait Gallery, 
London, is typical. The 
Washington of the State 
House, Boston, is a char- 
acteristic specimen of his 
portrait statues, in which 
he was famous for concen- 
trating attention upon the 
head and for imparting to 
it intellectuality. 


lanl 
VII. THe UNITED STATES pig. 243—FLAXMAN. MONUMENT OF 
NELSON. ST. PAUL’S, LONDON. (PHOTO. 


The early period. The MANSELL) 

plastic manifestations of 

neoclassicism in Austria, Belgium, and Spain are not so dif- 
ferent from those in other countries nor of such universal sig- 
nificance as to demand separate treatment; nor would the 
meagre beginnings of sculpture in the United States call for 
special discussion, if this were not an American book. Puri- 
tanic aversion to art and the simple condition of the colonists 
were unfavorable to any production or even importation until 
the middle of the eighteenth century. Several European sculp- 


428 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


tors who obtained orders here subsequent to this date have 
already been mentioned; but native production had already 
begun on a humble scale. The work of the earliest American 
sculptors did not definitely belong to any school but was the 
result of the poor conglomerate artistic education that they 


FIG. 244—RUSH. WASHINGTON. INDEPENDENCE HALL, PHILADELPHIA. 
(COURTESY OF MR. WILFRED JORDAN) 


could pick up in this remote country from prints, casts, or the 
very few examples of European sculpture that they chanced 
to see. Yet even in the United States they fell more or less 
under the influence of neoclassicism. In these first endeavors, 
with their comparative rudeness, American sculpture -passed 
through a phase which was, in a way, as truly “primitive” 
as archaic Greek or Romanesque sculpture and which pos- 


NEOCLASSICISM 429 


sesses tne charm of primitive sincerity and hard effort. The 
outstanding figure of this early stage of American sculpture 
was William Rush of Philadelphia (1756-1833), who con- 
fined himself to the materials of wood and clay and all of 
whose performances betray clearly the wood-carver’s meth- 
ods. His feminine allegorical figures are as neoclassic as 
they are anything, but the wood-carver’s technique gives 
them a rococo “fussiness” and projection of the folds. The 
Nymph of the Schuylkill, carved in wood for a fountain and 
preserved for us in a bronze replica in Fairmount Park, Phila- 
delphia, proves, in its grace of form and pleasantly clinging 
drapery, that almost all of these tyros managed through sheer 
innate talent to create one or two memorable works. The 
statue of Washington in 
Independence Hall (Fig. 
244) is a simple and im- 
pressive likeness, unspoiled 
by too close a contact with 
neoclassicism. It is an epi- 
tome of Rush’s style, even 
to the difficulty that the 
sculptor encountered in ¢cs- 
saying an easy posture. 
Developed neoclassicism. 
With the increasing cul- 
tural development of the 
United States came the 
habit of study in Italy and 
the consequent absolute 
surrender to neoclassicism. 
The chief sculptors in the yg. 245—Horat10 GREENOUGH. WASH- 
generation after Rush were INGTON. SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 
Greenough, Powers, and WASHINGTON. (COURTESY OF THE 
Go ord All three, have COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS ) 
ing once established themselves in Italy, remained there for a 
large part of their lives, shipping their orders to America. 
Their activities extended far into the nineteenth century, be- 
yond the chronological but not the stylistic lmits of 
neoclassicism. Horatio Greenough of Boston (1805-1852) 


430 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


exhibits his dull average of neoclassic mythology in such 
works as the Cupid Bound of the Boston Museum. His seated 
Washington (Fig. 245) is tricked out as a Phidian Zeus; but 
its faults are more the faults of the epoch. The bust of J. Q. 
Adams in the New York Historical Society betrays the fact 


FIG. 246—POWERS. GREEK SLAVE. 
CORCORAN ART GALLERY, WASHINGTON. 
(COURTESY OF CORCORAN ART GALLERY) 


that Greenough floundered 
even more than the usual 
neoclassicist. in-portraiture. 
Hiram Powers (1805-1873) 
owed his fame largely to 
the sensation created, in 
untutored America, by the 
nudity of his feminine fig- 
ures. The most celebrated 
example is the Greek Slave 
(Fig. 246), derived from 
the Medicean Venus. In 
works like the Daniel Web- 
ster in front of the State 
House, Boston, he achieved 
a slightly more veracious 
portraiture than Green- 
ough. Thomas Crawford 
of New York City (1813- 
1857) was more original 
and imaginative than either 
of his rivals, initiating the 
American tradition of 
themes for national glori- 
fication. His most inter- 
esting legacy is his decora- 
tion of the Capitol at 
Washington. The bronze 


Armed Freedom, which crowns the dome, is a conception of 
real majesty, almost inspired. Although his pediment of the 
Senate Wing is a disjointed composition, some of the separate 
forms are not to be forgotten, especially the America, con- 
ceived in the same high mood as the Armed Freedom, and the 


ORD. BRONZE DOORS, CAPITOL, WASHINGTON. 
L. C. HANDY) 


431 


432 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


seated and dejected Indian chieftain. His bronze doors of 
the Senate Portico, representing the terrors of war and the 
blessings of peace (Fig. 247), were another innovation in our 
country. In many respects, as in the simplicity of composi- 
tion, lucidity of narrative, and pleasantly conceived and exe- 
cuted figures, they constitute Crawford’s masterpiece. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


The standard monographs on Canova and Thorvaldsen are: 
A. G. Meyer, Canova, Leipzig, 1898; V. Malamani, Antonio 
Canova, Milan, 1911; E. Plon, Thorvaldsen, sa vie et son wuvre, 
Paris, 1874; S. Miiller, Thorvaldsen, hans Liv og hans Vaerker, 
Copenhagen, 1893; and A. Rosenberg, Thorwaldsen, Leipzig, 1896. 
With their usual ability at illuminating generalization, the 
French have produced three important books on the temper and 
production of French neoclassicism, which are also essential for 
an understanding of the epoch throughout Europe: F. Benoit, 
Tart francais sous la révolution et Vempire, Paris, 1897; L 
Bertrand, La fin du classicisme et le retour a Vantique, Paris, 
1897; and M. Dreyfous, Les arts et les artistes pendant la période 
révolutionnaire, Paris, 1906. More detailed information upon 
Chinard may be sought in C. Saunier’s article in the Gazette 
des Beaux Arts, 1910, I, pp. 23-42. The German exponents of 
neoclassicism are studied by A. Spemann in Dannecker, Berlin, 
1909, and by K. Eggers in Johann Gottfried Schadow und Chris- 
tian Daniel Rauch (in R. Dohme, Kunst und Kinstler der ersten 
Halfte des 19. Jahrhunderts, vol. I, Leipzig, 1886). For English 
sculptors of the epoch, the interested may turn to J. Doin, John 
Flaxman, Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1911, I, pp. 283-246 and 330- 
342, and A. J. Raymond, Life and Works of Sir Francis Chan- 
trey, London, 1904. The period just preceding native production 
in America is investigated by F. Kimball in The Beginnings of 
Sculpture in Colonial America, Art and Archeology, VIII 
(1919), pp. 185-189; the same periodical, XI (1921), pp. 245-247, 
contains a good era: on Rush by W. Jordan. 


CHAPTBRAX LY. 
MODERN SCULPTURE 
I. INTRODUCTORY 


General characteristics. Despite the freer play permitted 
to individual proclivities in modern times and despite the con- 
sequent premium set upon originality, it is possible to observe 
one or two qualities that have been pursued with a fair degree 
of unanimity, and to discern several very general and consecu- 
tive movements. Throughout the nineteenth century there 
was a constantly increasing tendency to reproduce nature 
more accurately than ever before in the world’s history. 
This characteristic, which came partly as a reaction against 
neoclassic aloofness from actuality, may be described, for 
want of a more specific term, as a kind of realism. It has 
culminated in our own day in that unsparing faithfulness 
to the model which marked Rodin’s first period and which 
constitutes the ambition of many eminent artists of the 
present generation. With another large group of sculptors, 
however, the turn of the century has brought an organized 
opposition in the shape of a reversion to the ideals of archaic 
Greek, Romanesque, and oriental art. Clearly perceptible, 
also, has been the tendency in sculpture to the cultivation of 
form for form’s sake; and this propensity, instead of suc- 
cumbing, has even been accentuated by the return to the 
primitive. A statue or relief no longer has to enshrine some 
idea or passion of its author or represent a dead or living 
personage. It has very commonly been enough that it be 
nothing more than the study of a posture as an esthetic end 
in itself. The results have been an inordinate devotion to 
that condition in which form and motion are best exhibited, 
the nude, and a feverish search after ever new and therefore 

433 


434 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


often fantastic_attitudesand_ activities of the body, which 
reached its climax in Rodin. 

Evolution of modern sculpture. In the second quarter of 
the nineteenth century there was developed throughout 
Europe and the United States a style which, though for 
ideal subjects it still abided pretty closely by neoclassic 
precedent, yet for its numerous portrait busts and statues 
adopted a moderate realism. The modelling included further 
and better definition of the object than in the neoclassic 
period, but the surfaces remained hard and dry. Contem- 
porary costume was allowed; but very commonly a purely 
decorative mantle was still thrown over the shoulders, and 
even to the present day ancient garb has been revived in 
sporadic cases in the feeling that it enhances the impression 
of the heroic. Romanticism, which matured during this 
period, affected the themes of sculpture much less than those 
of painting. It was then also that there began to manifest 
itself in full force the passion for plastic commemoration 
which has made the last hundred years an age of public 
monuments. After the middle of the century another tend- 
ency gained general European and American acceptance—a 
renewed interest in the Renaissance, to which was soon added 
an enthusiasm for the baroque and rococo, especially the 
baroque as embodied by Rubens. The imitations consisted 
in the imposition of rather superficial borrowings from these 
periods upon forms thoroughly modern in substance and in 
feeling. From this time on, France definitely assumed the 
leadership; and even though there may be at least some 
slight ground for the accusation, occasionally brought against 
French sculpture, of a velleity for the melodramatic, it has 
always maintained a technical supremacy and exhibited a 
vitality in new developments that have exerted a great in- 
fluence upon European and American art. 

The pictorial tendency in sculpture, assisted by the en- 
thusiasm for the baroque, became general by the last quarter 
of the century and culminated in Rodin’s importation of 
pictorial impressionism into sculpture. Not only, as in the 
baroque, did the sculptor choose transitory and violent phases 
of movement and cast his draperies in great sweeps that would 


MODERN SCULPTURE 435 


be the delight of the painter’s brush; but he gradually for- 
sook the shining smoothness of neoclassicism, and broke up 
his surfaces into a succession of bosses and depressions for 
the purpose of superinducing upon them an uninterrupted 
play of pictorial light. and shade. The more modern style 
of the later nineteenth century was first evolved in France 
and Germany and then spread to the other countries of 
Europe and to America. The impressionistic proclivity in 
sculpture was much influenced by the school of impressionists 
in painting, among whose aims was the desire to reproduce the 
chiaroscuro of nature. The impressionistic sculptors sum- 
marized the unessentials and modelled clearly only the sig- 
nificant details. One of the results was that the finished 
marble or particularly the finished bronze preserved the 
rough expanses and lines of the clay sketch; and this 
“sketchiness” has been much valued by modern sculptors 
under the conception that it gives to the work the freshness 
and the casual quality of a first “impression.” Parts of the 
figures were sometimes hidden in the rough marble block in 
order to attain in sculpture the effect of the blurred and 
fading outlines of impressionistic painting. The end of the 
nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century brought 
a reaction from the pictorial attitude. Its protagonists have 
sought to revive the sense of strongly felt and powerfully 
outlined form, and thus to restore to sculpture its truly 
sculptural quality. Almost inevitably they were led to an 
imitation of the past eras in which the sculptural attitude was 
most pronounced, the archaic Greek and the Romanesque. 
Indeed, for this and other reasons, perhaps the most char- 
acteristic note of the sculpture of today is the imitation of 
the primitive. One of the other reasons is the reaction from 
that realistic reproduction of nature which marked the nine- 
teenth century. There is now a very general tendency to 
adopt the standpoint of more primitive art which sacrificed 
accurate representation to the feeling for design and strongly 
defined form, to other esthetic exigencies, and to expressive- 
ness. We are living in an age of artistic stylization, and it 
has only needed an exaggeration of this attitude to produce 
Post-Impressionism. 


436 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 
II. FRANCE 
A. THE INTERVAL BETWEEN THE FIRST AND SECOND EMPIRE 


The Progressives 


The overthrow of the barriers of neoclassicism was begun 
for sculpture in France by Rude, David d’Angers, and Barye. 
They found themselves somewhat at loggerheads with the 
Academy, which, reéstablished in 1816, still upheld more or 
less rigidly the rules of neoclassicism against Romanticism 
and embryonic realism; but even the conservatives henceforth 
modelled more naturalistically than the earlier and stricter 
neoclassicists. 

Rude. The leading figure among the harbingers of modern 
conceptions in sculpture was Francois Rude of Dijon (1784- 
1855), active chiefly at Paris. He always remained more 
or less of a formal believer in the theories of neoclassicism, 
and at the beginning and end of his career exemplified them; 
but when he allowed his natural instincts to have their play, 
he abided by his Burgundian birthright of a straightforward 
realism, with an addiction to accessories of genre, and a cer- 
tain practicality that somewhat stifled imaginative afflatus. 
The phase of his art in which he most obviously violated the 
restrictions of the neoclassicists was the infusion of his forms 
with animation. The first premonitions of this new manner 
appear in the Neapolitan Fisher Boy in the Louvre. The 
unusual pose, the accessories of cap, net, scapulary, and tor- 
toise, above all the opening of the mouth into a captivating 
smile, are certainly a break with tradition. In his most 
renowned achievement, the group of the Departure of the 
Volunteers on the Arc de |’Etoile, Paris, tradition was strong 
enough to exclude contemporary costume and to admit only 
nudes and antique armor; but the closely knit composition 
is instinct with movement, the most superb embodiment of 
which is the goddess of war shouting the Marseillaise. He 
represented in some characteristic activity even his com- 
memorative statues (Fig. 248), and, although he occasionally 
retained the decorative mantle, he clothed these figures in the 


MODERN SCULPTURE 437 


costume of the period to which they belonged. He did not 
possess enough imagination to raise his ideal subjects above 
the ordinary standard, and almost all of his few religious 
works are worse than negli- 
gible. It was rather the im- 
petuosity of patriotism that 
lent force to the De- 
parture of the Volunteers. 
A true Burgundian, he usu- 
ally excelled only when he 
clung to the rendering of a 
definite personality. 

David d’Angers. Less 
radical and therefore more 
popular than Rude was 
Pierre Jean David of An- 
gers (1788-1856), called 
David d’Angers to distin- 
guish him from the painter 
of the same name. His aim 
was to make sculpture “na- £10, 48 nem, oveaent of Mar 
tional,” that is, torepresent paris. (pHoTo. BULLOZ) 
the subjects that were up- 
permost in the French popular mind of the moment and to 
treat them in such a way that they would appeal to the 
ordinary intellect of the period. Such an attitude turned 
him naturally to the execution of the monuments of famous 
men that the epoch craved. He was enough of an innovator 
to clothe them in the costume of their period; but occasion- 
ally, as in the Racine at La Ferté-Milon, he reverted to 
classic dress, and he was much addicted to the enveloping 
mantle. In his characterizations he was less powerful and 
incisive, drier and more pompous than Rude. He did not 
ordinarily choose some typical moment of activity but en- 
deavored to compress into the portrait the sum of his sub- 
ject’s permanent characteristics. To the number of his best 
achievements belong the Corneille at Rouen, the Drouot at 
Nancy (Fig. 249), the Thomas Jefferson in the Capitol, 
Washington, and the pediment of the Panthéon at Paris, 


438 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


which reveals France honoring civic and military heroes. 
He tried his hand, of course, at the customary pieces of 
neoclassic mythology, history, and allegory; but, like his 
other achievements, they 
are wanting in charm and 
magnetism, because of 
what was perhaps the most 
fatal deficiency in his ar- 
tistic make-up, the lack of 
any adequate sense of 
physical beauty. His xs- 
thetic reputation must rest 
ultimately upon his many 
medallions of past and con- 
temporary celebrities. 
Barye. Much bolder in 
his innovations than either 
Rude or David d’Angers 
but less accredited in his 
day, because of the sphere 
of expression that he chose, 
the life of animals, was 
FIG. 249—DAVID D’ANGERS. STATUE OF Antoine Louis Barye of 
? DROUOT. NANCY Paris (1796-1875). Animal 
life was first made by him 
a principal subject for sculpture, whereas hitherto in western 
art it had been exalted to such a position only in a few 
isolated instances. Working both in the large and for the 
minor arts, he ran the gamut of the emotions that could be 
evoked from his themes, sometimes humorous, as in the 
standing Bear, sometimes epic, as in the superb Lion at the 
entrance to the Pavillon de Flore of the Louvre; but the 
subjects of his predilection were groups of two beasts en- 
gaged in a terrible life and death struggle. These bloody 
scenes from the jungle he could never have witnessed in the 
Zoo, and it was here that his imagination came chiefly into 
play. His works are full of such bits of naturalistic observa- 
tion as the cruel twisting of the feline’s tail as it crushes 
or devours. With the forms of beasts he sometimes 


MODERN SCULPTURE 439 


introduced human beings, but he tended to consider them 
only as members of the animal kingdom. The _ bodies 
are of a sturdy, almost brutish type in his most preten- 
tious undertaking with the human form, the four groups, 
in stone, of War, Peace, Force, and Order, for one of 
the inner faces of the Carrousel courtyard of the Louvre, 
repetitions of which have been set up in Mount Vernon 
Square, Baltimore. The other innovation for which Barye 


FIG. 250—BARYE. JAGUAR DEVOURING HARE. LOUVRE, PARIS. (PHOTO. 
ALIN ARI) 


was important was the broad treatment which is a form of 
sculptural impressionism. He began with the old, precise 
technique of realism, but he gradually developed the other 
method, suppressing small details, as of the mane or skin, 
and emphasizing only the great planes and masses, as of the 
limbs and major muscles. A comparison of two groups in 
the Louvre, the early Tiger and the Gavial and the late 
Jaguar and the Hare (Fig. 250), will show the difference. 
Another interesting factor in his technique was the lively 


440 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


sense of color and the craftsman’s skill exhibited in patinas 
for his bronzes, including great varieties of greens and browns 
and sometimes even red and frosted silver. 


The Conservatives 


Pradier. The most characteristic works of James Pradier 
(1790-1852), the champion of the academic coterie, were 
mythological or allegorical. He treated them in such a way 
as not to shock the bourgeois taste of Louis Philippe’s reign 
by novelties or passages of genius, and on the other hand 
he never disturbed his patrons by falling technically below 
the level of respectable mediocrity. In his numerous 
feminine nudes, as in the Psyche of the Louvre, he ventured 
just enough of the fleshly as not to hurt the prudishness and 
yet to appeal to the sensuality that lay hidden beneath the 
smugness of the French middle class. Although his style 
at times becomes ponderous, his smoothness and his somewhat 
dignified grace may even please modern students in their less 
energetic moods. His best monumental achievements include 
the figures of Lille and Strassburg in the Place de la Con- 
corde, Paris, and the four Victories with sinuous draperies 
in the spandrels of the Are de I’Etoile. 


B. THE PROGRESSIVE SCULPTORS OF THE SECOND EMPIRE 


Carpeaux. The master who chronologically and spiritually 
belonged most thoroughly to the Second Empire was Jean 
Baptiste Carpeaux of Valenciennes (1827-1875). Two early 
works done at Rome and now in the Louvre reveal the most 
significant influences that helped throughout his life to mould 
his personality as an artist. The Neapolitan Fisher Boy 
listening to a sound in a shell is derived from the prototype. 
of Rude, but its proportions and contortion already bear wit- 
ness to his fervid admiration for Michael Angelo. The realis- 
tic bronze group of the Death of Ugolino and his Sons, a sub- 
ject taken from the thirty-third canto of Dante’s Inferno, 
exhibits everywhere the dependence upon the great Florentine, 
even in the fact that it is an attempt to translate the con- 
tortions of the Laocodn group into a modern theme. Car- 


MODERN SCULPTURE 441 


peaux expressed himself most characteristically and en- 
duringly in the crouching Flora and rollicking putt? for the 
Pavillon de Flore (Fig. 251) and in the group of the Dance 
on the right of the entrance to the Opéra at Paris. It was 
in these productions that he incorporated with the greatest 
abandon the license and feverish thirst for pleasure of the 
Second Empire. The Flemish blood that he derived from 
Valenciennes perhaps contributed to his creation of buxom, 


FIG. 251—CARPEAUX. DECORATION OF THE PAVILLON DE FLORE, LOUVRE, 
PARIS. (PHOTO. GIRAUDON) 


frankly carnal, and agitated feminine forms which shocked 
even his contemporaries and constitute a violent break with 
academic tradition. The faces are animate with expression, 
and the glance is almost painful in its intensity. Often he so 
gives the impression of momentary activity that his works 
seem like improvisations. All these qualities show Carpeaux 
to have been influenced by the baroque; the centrifugal ef- 
fects of hair, drapery, and accessories, the intricate composi- 
tion, and the cult of the sensual are even reminiscent of the 


442 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


rococo. He also stood in the vanguard of those who intro- 
duced pictorial impressionism into sculpture, and he was 
largely responsible for the fashion of breaking up the surfaces 
with bosses and cavities for the sake of chiaroscuro. In the 
same nervous, alert, and sketchy style are his vividly char- 
acterized portraits, again strongly influenced by the rococo, 
especially in the loose sweeps of drapery. Masterful speci- 
mens are the Princess Mathilda and the Mlle. Fiocre of the 
Louvre and the Admiral Tréhouart at Versailles. 

Frémiet. Emmanuel Frémiet (1824-1910), a nephew and 
pupil of Rude, although he did his best work after the fall 
of Napoleon III, may be assigned to the Second Empire be- 
cause he came into prominence in this period and was inti- 
mately connected with its activities. Until the establish- 
ment of the Second Empire he was chiefly a sculptor of ani- 
mals, and continued to work in this phase of art, rivalling 
Barye in naturalistic skill. His most familiar achievement 
as an animalier is perhaps the young Pan playing with cub 
bears in the Luxembourg. Despite his productiveness in these 
themes and despite his success in standing figures of con- 
temporaries and of ideal personages, Frémiet will be chiefly 
remembered as the creator of a long series of superb eques- 
trian statues drawn from the history of earlier centuries, in- 
cluding such masterpieces as the Jeanne d’Arc of the Place 
de Rivoli, Paris, the Lantern-carrier of the Hotel de Ville, 
Paris, the Du Guesclin at Dinan, and the Colonel Howard in 
Mount Vernon Square, Baltimore (Fig. 252). It was no doubt 
partially the Romantic movement in his youth that caused 
him to devote himself to this successful evocation of the 
past; and it was the prevalent enthusiasm for the Quattro- 
cento that led him to adopt a precise realism especially in 
archeological details of costume and trappings of the horses, 
which he sought to make scrupulously correct. The classicist 
would certainly blame the multiplication of accessories and 
the effect of “fussiness” thus created; but here again Frémiet 
aimed at the decorative effects of the Renaissance. He also 


*One of the replicas is in Fairmount Park, Philadelphia. 


MODERN SCULPTURE 443 


infused his men and horses with the pride and strength that 
emanate from the portraits of the Quattrocento. The various 
kinds of horses, all exhibit- 
ing an expert knowledge of 
equine anatomy, play im- 
portant rdles in the char- 
acterization, and are 
among the very greatest in 
the history of art. 


Coal ob THIRD REPUBLIC. 
THE ELDER GENERATION 


THE PROGRESSIVES 


Dalou. The man who 
most thoroughly embodied 
the propensities of the 
earlier Third Republic was 
Jules Dalou (1838-1902). 
After the Commune of 1871 
he had to escape to Lon- FIG. 252—FREMIET. COLONEL HOWARD. 

is BALTIMORE. (COURTESY ,OF PEABODY 
don, and it was here that INSTITUTE, BALTIMORE) 
he first asserted one of the 
cardinal features of his style and of modern art, a pronounced 
naturalism. The most significant products of his eight years’ 
sojourn in England were a series of statues and statuettes 
of women engaged in some domestic activity, which may 
be illustrated, in this country, by the seated mother soothing 
a baby in the Metropolitan Museum. On his return to Paris 
in 1879 he led the way in the resuscitation of the baroque. 
His admiration for Rubens induced him not only to arrange 
his figures in compositions that are sometimes confused in 
their manifest effort after the pictorial, but also to cultivate 
anatomical realism and feeling for the quality of flesh. The 
first and most renowned achievement of this kind was the 
monument called the Triumph of the Republic in the Place 
de la Nation. The allegory of the French ideal of Fraternity, 
in the Petit Palais, Paris, in that it is a relief and is framed 


444 A HOSTORY OF SCULE RG 


like a painting, seems all the more a translation of one of 
Rubens’s pictures. The bronze group of Silenus accompanied 
by other Bacchanalian figures, in the Luxembourg Gardens 
(Fig. 253), 1s an even more pronounced reversion to the 
Flemish master both in theme and execution. Dalou was 
one of the first, if not the first, to construct memorials to 
famous men of the type in which the effigy is surrounded, 


FIG. 253—DALOU. SILENUS. LUXEMBOURG GARDENS, PARIS. (PHOTO. 
BULLOZ) 


usually at a lower level, by large related allegorical or histori- 
cal figures, often too loosely associated with the artistic com- 
position. Among the best examples is the Alphand monu- 
ment in the Avenue du Bois de Boulogne, Paris; but in the 
memorial to the painter Delacroix in the Luxembourg Gar- 
dens, the allegorical figures are arranged in a composition 
that outdoes the baroque in an altogether unjustified violence . 


MODERN SCULPTURE 445 


of movement and difficulty of equilibrium, and the idea of 
Time lifting Fame to offer a palm to the artist, while Apollo 
applauds beneath, approximates a bathos of conception that 
Dalou did not always succeed in avoiding. The most modern 
phase of his interest had always been the peasant and the 
workman, and, a socialist in politics, he had introduced 
laborers into his monuments wherever it had been possible. 
In his last years he returned to his predilection with re- 
newed ardor, doubtless encouraged by the example of 
Meunier. Forsaking the pompousness of allegory and reviv- 
ing the unaffected naturalism of his English period, he exe- 
cuted various sketches 
and left many clay mod- 
els of figures of workmen, 
now in the Petit Palais, 
for a great monument to 
Labor, but he died before 
the magnanimous scheme 
was realized. 

Falgwére. Alexandre 
Falguiére (1831-1900), 
the oldest of a Parisian 
coterie of sculptors from 
Toulouse, takes a distinct 
position in the evolution 
of French art chiefly 
through his feminine 
nudes, which usher in the 
modern sensual treatment 
of the undraped human 
figure and the modern de- 
votion to the physical FIG. 254—FALGUIERE. THE WOMAN WITH 
form as an esthetic end que pracock. MUSEUM, TOULOUSE. 
in itself. Going farther (FROM “ALEXANDRE FALGUIERE” BY LE- 
along the same natural- °N°® B&NERITE) 
istic road as Dalou, he modelled carnal types of nude women 
with a literalness that to some may be shocking and was cer-_ — 


oy, 


tainly prior to this date unparalleled (Fig. 254). His other f 


446 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


works were principally portrait statues and monuments. 
The former, such as the Corneille of the Théatre Francais, 
are vigorous pieces of characterization, obtained, as is the 
case with Rude, partly through telling postures and gestures 
which are unexpectedly restrained when we remember his 
passion for movement. He was generally incapable of any 
good imaginative compositions on a large scale, and, when 
his monuments consist of assemblies of figures, they are likely 
to err on the side of theatricality. One of the least objec- 
tionable (in collaboration with Mercié) is the memorial to 
Lafayette in Lafayette Square, Washington. 

Mercié. Falguiére’s favorite pupil, Antonin Mercié 
(1845-1916), really belongs to the later generation but may 
be considered here since he was,a member of the Toulousan 
group. His works have greater absolute worth than his 
master’s, but he was less of a roadbreaker. He first won 
recognition with a frank imitation of the Quattrocento, the 
bronze David of the Luxembourg, consciously based upon 
Donatello’s prototype. The memorial to Gounod in the Pare 
Monceau, Paris, is typical of his monuments of celebrities, 
which are very much in the manner of Falguiére’s, and 
neither better nor worse, except that what poetic material 
there is, however Pel OdPAniae: is more sincerely felt. His 
portrait figures, such as the ecueste am Lee at Richmond, 
Virginia, do not generally seize upon one with the compelling 
force of Falguiére in similar themes. His claim upon the at- 
tention of posterity rests rather upon two patriotic groups, in 
which, as so often happened in the history of French sculp- 
ture, love of country helped him to surpass his ordinary style 
of average excellence. These are the “Gloria Victis” of the 
courtyard of the Hdétel de Ville, Paris, which represents 
Fame carrying the dead body of a nude young soldier, and 
the “Quand Méme” in the Place d’ Armes, Belfort, whee 
represents an episode of the siege of Belfort in 1870- 1871, 
when an Alsatian woman seized the gun of a dying French 
soldier and herself assumed the defence of her country. The 
best that can be said of Mercié is that he rose to the height 
of both themes, in conception, composition, and forceful in- 


MODERN SCULPTURE 447 


spiration, exalting the poetic gift that appears in a minor 
degree in his other productions. 


The Conservatives 


Even the conservatives were now very much affected by 
the radical achievements of their day. 

Chapu. Henri Chapu (1833-1891) penetrated the real 
secret of Greek beauty, and while never becoming a neoclassic 
copyist, he ennobled_ his 
modern forms and ideas by 
accommodating them to 
many Hellenic standards. 
He devoted his art espe- 
cially to sepulchral monu- 
ments. He excelled in ideal 
feminine figures, in’ which 
realism is tempered by a 
study of the harmony and 
repose of ancient art, a re- 
strained degree of spiritual 
expression is attained, and 
a healthy sweetness is 
coupled with a proper ele- 
gance. The most cele- 
brated of the series are the 
sitting Jeanne d’Arc of the 
Louvre (Fig. 255) and the FIG. 255—CHAPU. JEANNE © D’ARC. 
personification of Youth LOUVRE, PARIS. (PHOTO. BRAUN) 
represented as decorating 
the bust of Henri Regnault, on his monument in the Cour 
du Mirier of the Ecole des Beaux Arts. Chapu’s poetic 
gifts and sense of classic beauty did not hinder him from 
producing finely characterized portraits in medals and such 
impressive portrait statues, marked by a sane realism, as 
the Berryer of the Palais de Justice, Paris. His popularity 
as a teacher and.the example of his own works were cogent 
factors in disseminating that more reasonable imitation of 


448 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the antique which has distinguished so much European and 
American sculpture of the nineteenth century. 

Dubois. More tangibly than any other French sculptor 
of the period, Paul Dubois (1829-1905) revealed the effect 
of the revived interest in the Renaissance, but he translated 
his imitations into terms of individual good taste and origi- 
nality. He first attracted 
attention by producing, in 
the manner of the Quattro- 
cento, the St. John Baptist 
(Fig. 256) and the Floren- 
tine Singer, both bronzes 
and in the Louvre. Subse- 
quently he broadened his 
scope to include the Cin- 
quecento, most notably in 
the tomb of ‘General La- 
moriciére in the cathedral 
of Nantes, suggested by the 
sepulchres of the French 
Renaissance and influenced, 
in its allegorical personifi- 
cations, by Michael An- 
gelo. His equestrian Jeanne 
d’Are in front of the ca- 
thedral of Reims, distin- 
ro, Bie —naue povols. St JOHN guished by the spirituality 
BRAUN) i ‘and delicacy that he had 

culled from the Italian 
sculpture of the fifteenth century, is less heroic and more 
visionary than the statue by Frémiet. 


D. THE THIRD REPUBLIC. THE YOUNGER GENERATION 


Rodin’s style. The tendencies toward naturalism, pic- 
torialism, and impressionism that had been maturing in the 
more advanced coteries of sculptors during the nineteenth 
century culminated in Auguste Rodin (1840-1917). So far 
as such a superlatively individualistic artist can be said 


MODERN SCULPTURE 445 


to be indebted to any predecessor, he owed most to a study 
of the realistic phases of late Gothic sculpture and the 
works of Michael Angelo and Carpeaux. His first produc- 
tions are simply pieces of audacious naturalism, rendered 
with a supreme technical skill adequate to the difficult 
problems that he set himself. Chief among his early works 
are the youth waking to consciousness, known as the Age 
of Bronze, the St. John Baptist, both in the Luxembourg, 
and the six Burghers of Calais in the Jardin Richelieu of 
Calais. In these achievements, all of which are executed in 
bronze, impressionism had already begun, but in his second 
manner it was developed to a degree never dreamed of 
before in sculpture. He fully conformed to his oft repeated 
statement that sculpture should consist only of. successive 
bosses and hollows. He so far neglected the modelling of 
non-significant parts and sought for the blurred outlines of 
impressionistic painting that he first allowed large portions 
of the body to remain concealed in the block of stone and 
later even left in the rough certain sections that emerged. 
This trick he doubtless learned from Michael Angelo, and, 
like him, he delighted in the effect of mysticism. He also 
loved to represent all kinds of postures and instantaneous 
movement, which had hitherto been believed suited only to 
painting, and thus, with his emphasis upon chiaroscuro, he 
became the chief exponent of the modern pictorial character 
of sculpture. The injection of movement by Rodin into a 
figure or group did not usually result in wild gesticulation or 
projection of arms and legs; rather, he preserved a closed 
contour and obtained his effect by the tremendous strain of 
muscles and nerves within the contour, creating the impres- 
sion of concentrated energy. Despite his skill as a composer, 
the tendencies of his art, especially his pictorialism, pre- 
cluded the attainment of monumentality. All of these 
qualities would have made of a lesser man a cultivator of 
form merely for form’s sake, and indeed Rodin was again 
a protagonist of the modern attitude in ordinarily avoiding 
anything like the classical norms of physical loveliness. But 
in distinction from many of his imitators he vitalized this 
supreme interest in form by impressing his own powerful 


450 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


individuality upon all his productions and by often making 
them vehicles for ideas. These ideas, however vague and 
however inferior to the noble inspirations of greater periods 
in the world’s history, yet have a real existence. Rodin’s 
creations are apt to express sexual or domestic love and the 
will to power. His contortions, like those of Michael Angelo, 


FIG. 257—RODIN. THE KISS. MUSEE RODIN, PARIS. (PHOTO. BRAUN) 


incorporate and even beautify sincere-passion, in his case the 
tragedy of modern doubts, uncertainties, and discontents, the 
struggle within the modern soul. | 

Rodin’s works. Of the more pretentious undertakings of 
his second manner may be mentioned: the monument to 
Victor Hugo now set up in the garden of the Palais-Royal; 
the statue of Balzac in the Musée Rodin, Paris; and the 
never completed doors for the entrance to the Palais des Arts 


MODERN SCULPTURE 451 


Décoratifs, known as the Gate of Hell, the conceptions of 
which were first derived from the Divine Comedy but were 
gradually extended to include a general setting forth of 
human sorrows and suffering. Several of the many studies 
that he made for the doors amidst his ever changing de- 
signs, he dissociated in the course of time and developed 
into separate works. Among these are: the Ugolino group 


FIG. 258—RODIN. BUST OF HENRI ROCHEFORT. LUXEMBOURG, PARIS. 
(PHOTO. BULLOZ) 


in the Musée Rodin; the statues of the conscience-stricken 
Adam (bronze original in the Metropolitan) and Eve 
(replica in the Metropolitan) ; the Kiss (Fig. 257), originally 
intended for the Paolo and Francesca of the Fifth Inferno; 
and the Thinker, in front of the Panthéon at Paris. His 
other studies of form and movement in single figures and 
groups are well-nigh countless because, never handling the 
marble himself or undertaking the casting in bronze, he 


452 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


needed to do only the small clay sketches and saved time 
by turning them over to assistants to be enlarged by a 
mechanical process and to be translated into more permanent 
material. In his portrait busts (Fig. 258) his usual 
technique is united to high power of characterization and to 
emphasis upon the noblest traits of his subjects. 

Maillol. At the head of the French -return-to-the primitive 
stands Aristide Maillol (b. 1861). Instead of the pictorial 
proclivity of Rodin, he seeks to be more truly sculptural. 
Instead of the violent movement of Rodin and Dalou, he 
strives for heavy repose, with which are combined strength, 
substantiality, and massiveness of form. Instead of Rodin’s 
torturing of the surface for effects of light and shade, he 
models as little as possible, producing great, simple planes, 
but with his rugged, primitive types and dependence upon 
the archaic Greek, achieving results that are quite different 
from the smooth and elegant simplification of neoclassicism. 
His comparatively few works, consisting principally of the 
same powerful feminine physique in different poses (Fig. 
259), reveal his desire to make his figures look like solid 
pieces of architecture. 

Bartholomé. The third outstanding figure in this genera- 
tion is Albert Bartholomé (b. 1848), a thorough modern in 
his independence of any schools, in his rejection of classic 
canons, and in his extreme originality of conception. The 
closest relative of his style is the pronounced and thoroughly 
unclassical naturalism of Rodin’s early period. Possibly 
because he devoted himself wholly to painting until 1886, 
he has become one of the most unmistakable exponents of 
modern sculptural pictorialism both in composition and in 
modelling; but although he seeks a subtle chiaroscuro, 
especially in the countenance, he avoids Rodin’s broken and 
sketchy surfaces. Like Rodin, he stands out from the crowd 
of Beaux-Arts sculptors by having created a physical type, 
particularly in feminine figures, peculiarly his own. His 
most celebrated work is the monument tothe nameless dead 
at the end of the principal avenue of Pére Lachaise, Paris 
(Fig. 260). The fundamental idea is mankind’s horror of the 
universal phenomenon of death and the (non-Christian) 


(YAH dVUDOLOHd ‘NOdAVUYID JO ASAULYNOD) “NVWOM GaLVaS “IOTIIVN—6GZ ‘Old 


ne 
ae 
= 
> 
= 
= 
© 
C2 
A 
ec 
= 
a 
© 
A 


454 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


solution to this problem, the victory of earthly love over 
death and the consolation that comes from meeting death 
together with the beloved. The height of conception and 
execution here exemplified Bartholomé has never been able to 
attain again. In comparison, the tomb of Rousseau in the 
Panthéon is commonplace; the undeniable exaltation of his 
allegorical figure representing the Defence of Paris, in the 
Place du Carrousel, falls below the greatness of the theme 


FIG. 260—BARTHOLOME. MONUMENT TO THE DEAD. PERE LACHAISE, 
PARIS. (PHOTO. BRAUN) 


and is obscured by his manifest interest in the modelling of a 
feminine body. Indeed, much of his recent output has con- 
sisted in feminine nudes, which, in their varying postures, 
look like plastic translations of paintings by Degas and the 
chief purpose of which is apparently the study of form. 
Other French sculptors of today. The most prominent 
French pupil of Rodin is Emile Antoine Bourdelle (b. 1861), 
among whose characteristic works are the eccentrically posed 
Heracles in the National Gallery of Modern Art, Rome, and 


MODERN SCULPTURE 455 


the bust of Beethoven in the Luxembourg. In the reliefs for 
the Théatre des Champs-Elysées, Paris, he has passed, for 
architectural decoration, into an even more archaistic style 
than that championed by Maillol. Paul Landowski (hb. 
1875), in adopting the frank naturalism of Bartholomé and 
of Rodin’s first period, has turned usually for his subjects 
to the primitive types of humanity that appear in his Hymn 
to Dawn in the garden of the Petit Palais,-Paris. Henri 
Bouchard, born the same year and Landowski’s collaborator 
in the monument to the Reformation at Geneva, has ordi- 
narily devoted himself, in the fashion set by Meunier, to the 
representation of laborers, as in the Blacksmith of the Metro- 
politan Museum, or to the powerful and archeological 
realism of Frémiet, as in the Claus Sluter of the Ducal 
Palace at Dijon. He applies a certain degree of impression- 
ism to his chosen subjects but has succeeded in avoiding 
Rodin’s spasmodic movements. 


III. GERMANY AND RELATED COUNTRIES 


A. THE FIRST HALF OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 


For portraiture, German sculpture now adopted the char- 
acteristic realism of the period, but in a less vigorous and 
incisive form than was achieved in France. The plastic at- 
tainments of Germany during the period were summed up, 
at their best, by Daniel Christian Rauch of Berlin (1777- 
1857), who exercised a dominating influence upon the Teu- 
tonic sculptural output of the age. His most important pro- 
ductions are his long line of portrait statues and busts, in 
which he incorporated somewhat less realism than his German 
predecessor, Schadow, or the Frenchman whom he in so many 
respects resembled, David d’Angers. Although he usually 
confined himself to static attitudes for characterization, he 
employed contemporary costume; but he accommodated its 
lines as far as possible to classical garb, and he enhanced this 
effect by a very liberal use of the enveloping mantle. The 
most celebrated example of his portraiture, the equestrian 
monument of Frederick the Great at Berlin (Fig. 261), exhib- 
its his practice of decorating his pedestals with related histor- 


456 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


ical and allegorical statuettes and reliefs. In the six Victories 
in the Walhalla or Temple of Fame at Ratisbon, he partially 
transcended the ordinary style of the epoch for ideal crea- 
tions. They are well individualized in different moods, such 
as joy for triumph or sorrow for the fallen, and they are 
marked not only by real Hellenic, in distinction from neo- 


FIG. 261—RAUCH. MONUMENT OF FREDERICK THE GREAT. BERLIN. (PHOTO. 
PHOTOGRAPHISCHE GESELLSCHAFT, BERLIN) 


classic, feeling, but also by an adaptation of classical prece- 
dents to a partially German and almost modern type of 
womanhood. 


B. THE SECOND HALF OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY 


Introductory. The outstanding trait of Teutonic sculpture 
in the second half of the nineteenth century was a very pro- 
nounced form of the European return to the baroque. The 


MODERN SCULPTURE 457 


loud strains of the baroque, indeed, were well fitted to cele- 
brate Teutonic pride in the victories of the epoch and in the 
establishment of the German empire. In Germany, as in 
France, there was an “opposition,” here taking the form 
especially of a reaction to the employment, in monuments, of 
the huge, simple, and impressive, with a predominance of 
architecture over sculpture. 


FIG. 262—BEGAS. MONUMENT TO KAISER WILLIAM I. BERLIN 


Berlin. The roadbreaker in the revival of the baroque, in 
the renunciation of the dry semi-realism of the Rauch 
tradition for a greater naturalism, and in the adoption of 
pictorial compositions, surfaces, and draperies, was_Reinhold 
Begas of Berlin (1831-1911). His monument to Kaiser 
William I at the west of the Royal Palace, Berlin (Fig. 262), 
is a complete baroque outburst which has sacrificed the com- 
pactness that Rauch and his followers managed to maintain 
in composition. The fountain to the southeast of the palace 


458 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


is a thorough-going imitation of Bernini’s fountains at Rome. 
The most tangible proof of his naturalism is his treatment of 
the feminine nude in a series of separate figures and groups. 
He reproduced with moderate success the softness of the 
flesh and the texture of the skin, bestowing on his forms a 
mild sensuality; but in distinction from Dalou and other con- 
temporary Frenchmen who were experimenting in the same 
plastic translation of Rubens, he represented a rather 
Teutonic type of womanhood, in which an abundance of fatty 
tissue tends to conceal the bony frame. Despite his innova- 
tions, there is a certain deadness about the style of Begas. 
Like the neoclassic sculptors against whom he protested, he 
was, after all, himself an imitator; the only essential differ- 
ence was that his models were baroque rather than ancient. 
His portrait busts, such as that of the painter Menzel in 
the National Gallery, Berlin, will remain his most enduring 
works, since they are much livelier characterizations than 
his commemorative statues. 

Among the sculptors at Berlin who were still educated in 
the Rauch tradition, Rudolf-Siemering (1835-1905) may be 
singled out for mention because he did the huge Washington 
Monument at the entrance to Fairmount Park, Philadelphia. 
it is strange that this should be the only instance in which 
he exhibited to any marked degree the influence of Begas’s 
complicated baroque conceptions for memorials. 

The reaction from the baroque. The leader of the reaction 
from the way in which the modern baroque monuments 
were broken up into a number of convulsed parts was the 
architect Bruno Schmitz (b. 1856). He returned to architec- 
ture as the chief medium for commemorative monuments, and 
he gave to this architecture a colossal, massive, rough, primi- 
tive character, often derived from Romanesque precedents 
but marked by a bizarre modernity in detail as well as in 
the general structure. Sculpture ordinarily played only a sub- 
ordinate role in the vast architectural assemblies. These 
gigantic piles of masonry embodied better than the baroque 
or any other one thing the pride of the Germans and the 
Hohenzollern. The most celebrated achievement of Bruno 
Schmitz is the monument near Leipzig commemorating 


MODERN SCULPTURE 459 


Napoleon’s defeat in the Battle of the Nations (Fig. 263). 
The United States possesses a memorial designed by Schmitz, 
the huge obelisk of the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Monument at 
Indianapolis, on which a slightly greater importance is given 
to the sculptural embellishment. 

Munch. The guide at Munich along the new paths was 
perhaps Michael Wagmiiller (1839-1881) ; but the much more 


FIG. 263—INTERIOR OF LEIPZIG MONUMENT. ARCHITECT, BRUNO SCHMITZ; 
SCULPTOR, FRANZ METZNER 


highly individualistic production of Rudolf Maison (1854- 
1904) has a greater interest. He often exaggerated to the 
most impossible degree the piecemeal-composition and pic- 
torial proclivities of the baroque, but he broke sharply with 
his contemporaries’ habit of depending, for their forms, on 
the baroque of the past, and studied his own forms directly 
from actuality. He thus evolved an intense naturalism, and 
he augmented this naturalism by an extremely veristic poly- 
chromy. His naturalism is most strikingly embodied in his 
statuettes of curious types of humanity; the combination of 


460 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


this naturalism with a frenzied form of the baroque appears 
in his Teichmann fountain at Bremen (Fig. 264). This 
monument is marked also by that German tendency to the 
bizarre in-conception, which, although he executed a number 


of works in a more rational style, is yet one of his constant 
traits. 


FIG. 2644—MAISON. TEICHMANN FOUNTAIN, BREMEN. (PHOTO. NEUE 
PHOTOGRAPHISCHE GESELLSCHAFT, STEGLITZ) 


Austria. During the seventies and eighties of the nine- 
teenth century, the Austrians continued to be satisfied with 
a style only slightly in advance of that compromise between 
realism and neoclassicism which they had adopted in the 
first half of the century. The leader in this slight advance 
was a foreigner, the Westphalian, Kaspar Zumbusch (1830- 
1915), who even developed a partial addiction to the baroque 
in the composition of his monuments and the postures of 
their subordinate figures. One of the most spirited statues 


MODERN SCULPTURE 461 


that he left behind him at Munich is the Count Rumford in 
the square called the Forum, a replica of which has been 
set up at Woburn, Mass., where Rumford was born. His 
principal works at Vienna are the memorials to Maria 
Theresa and to Beethoven in the squares of the same names. 

In the last quarter of the nineteenth century a real change 


FIG. 265—TILGNER. MOZART MONUMENT. VIENNA. (PHOTO. STENGEL AND 
CO., DRESDEN ) 


took place, production passed into the hands of native 
masters, and the general style was somewhat differentiated 
by an Austrian rather than a German tone. The separate 
character of Austrian sculpture consists in a greater lightness 
and gaiety, consonant with the volatile sensuality and tradi- 
tional spirit of Viennese life. In accordance with these 
qualities, artists turned more to an imitation of the rococo 
than of the baroque. The chief representative of this new 


462 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


phase of Austrian sculpture was Viktor Tilgner (1844-1896), 
who typified his day by a general stylistic eclecticism. His 
most celebrated monument, the memorial to Mozart in the 
Albrechts-Platz, Vienna (Fig. 265), is absolutely and, con- 
sidering the subject, properly rococo in treatment; his foun- 
tains, for instance the example in front of the theatre at 
Pressburg, recall the prototypes of Versailles; and his embel- 
lishment of public buildings, as of the Natural History 
Museum at Vienna, smacks of the eighteenth century. In 
some of his decoration, however, as in that of the Hofburg- 
Theater, Vienna, he successfully essayed Frémiet’s specialty, 
figures and busts of eminent personages of the past; and in his 
sepulchres, he even tried his hand at the chastity of the 
antique, introducing mourning feminine figures after the 
fashion of Chapu. His many portrait busts, in which he has 
caught and crystallized all aspects of contemporary Viennese 
life, are brilliant characterizations, rococo in spirit and execu- 
tion. 


C. THE PRESENT GENERATION 


Hildebrand. If one seeks for a distinctive quality in the 
, most recent sculpture produced in Teutonic territory and in 
countries, such as Hungary and the smaller Slavic states, 
which have been somewhat influenced by the modern German 
esthetic spirit, he will probably find it in an even more 
tangible proclivity for the bizarre than is to be met with in 
other lands. Yet the greater part of this sculpture depends 
for its basic principles upon Adolf Hildebrand. (1847-1921), 
who was not himself betrayed into the ways of the abnormal. 
The German city with which his activity was chiefly con- 
nected was Munich. He owed the conception of his new 
style to the German painter, Hans von Marées, who revolu- 
tionized German art by representing man as the. human 
animal and by studying the pictorial effects of his figures in 
space. Hildebrand took the same attitude towards the nude 
form and thought it the only theme really worthy of repre- 
sentation. Such a conception at once directed him towards 
the antique. He led the way in a reaction against the turbu- 


MODERN SCULPTURE 463 


lence and subjective char- 
acter of the prevalent imi- 
tations of the baroque to 
the repose and objective 
character of Greek sculp- 
ture; but, a true modern, 
he went much farther than 
the Greeks in his natural- 
ism. By emphasizing the 
bony structure and joints 
of the body, by setting it 
solidly upon the ground, by 
oceasionally choosing a 
somewhat Polyclitan phys- 
ical type, he laid the 
foundations for the recent 
sculptural tendency which 
is represented in France by 
Maillol. More than any 
other German — sculptor 
hitherto considered, he fell 
in with the modern cult. of 
form for form’s sake. His 
typical productions are 
male nudes (Fig. 266). He 
did not confine himself, 
however, to static poses. 
He studied the body in 
many phases of activity, 
but even upon these he be- 
stowed ancient calm and 
compositional compactness. ric. 266—HILDEBRAND. YOUTHFUL 
His works of this kind in- MASCULINE NUDE. NATIONAL GAL- 
clude Q series of nude Sea aaa (PHOTO. DR. FR. STOEDT- 
youths, the comparative 

thinness of whose bodies affords one of the occasional proofs, 
in Hildebrand’s output, of a not very vital influence 
of the Quattrocento. The application of his peculiar manner 
to monumental undertakings may be studied in the Wittels- 


464 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


bach Fountain of the Maximilians-Platz, Munich. The 
equestrian Bismarck at Bremen is not only an epitome of his 
style, but itself constitutes a prime example of the marvellous 
compression of force and character into a single figure or 
group which is perhaps Hildebrand’s most memorable attain- 
ment. His portraits also inaugurated a new era in German. 
sculpture by their direct naturalism and characterization, 
by their simplicity, by the objective approach from which 
the sculptor excludes his own interpretation, and by the study, 
even in such subjects, of form. Among many examples may be 
mentioned the bust of Bocklin in the National Gallery, 
Berlin, and of Otto Ludwig in the English Garden at 
Meiningen. 

Hildebrand’s circle. Hildebrand embodied his esthetic 
propaganda in a book, ‘The Problem of Form,” which has 
exerted a wide influence, especially in a definite school of 
pupils at Munich. Some of his imitators have returned to 
antique costume or the nude even for portraits. His most 
faithful follower at Munich is perhaps Hermann Hahn (b. 
1868), who is rather unfairly represented in this country by 
the nude Goethe in Lincoln Park, Chicago. Louis Tuaillon 
of Berlin (1862-1917) was as much indebted directly to Hans 
von Marées as to Hildebrand. His most celebrated works 
are the mounted Amazon in the National Gallery, Berlin, one 
of the most praiseworthy examples of the infusion of modern 
naturalism into a noble antique mould, and the equestrian 
Kaiser Frederick near the railway station at Bremen, in 
which he has dared the atavism of a Roman emperor’s mili- 
tary garb, clinging so tight as to give the effect of a nude. 
The Swiss, Hermann Haller (b. 1880), whether consciously 
affected by Hildebrand or not, bids fair to prove the most 
talented perpetuator of his principles; but he brings to this 
task a highly personal conception of physical beauty. He 
usually prefers rather lank bodies, the main lines of which 
are based upon modern naturalism but the modelling of 
which is partially simplified. The most prominent German 
sculptors who have been influenced by Maillol are Bernhard 
Hoetger (b. 1874) and Wilhelm Lehmbruck (1881-1919). 
The latter, after a beginning in the ordinary style of the 


MODERN SCULPTURE 465 


academies, aligned himself with Maillol and executed stocky 
feminine nudes of the kind represented by his statue in the 
Museum of Duisburg; then, giving his allegiance to the 
general principles of Post-Impressionism rather than only to 
Maillol’s interpretation of them, he turned, with vague 
reminiscences of the Romanesque and of Donatello, to the 
other extreme of leanness and elongation. Characteristic 
examples are the figures of a kneeling woman (National 
Gallery, Berlin) and a stepping youth. In all this he was 
doubtless affected by the achievements of the Belgian Minne, 
and he has, indeed, something of Minne’s sombre outlook on 
life. 

Klinger. At the other pole from the tendencies sponsored 
by Hildebrand and Maillol stands the sculpture of the painter 
and engraver, Max Klinger of Leipzig (1857-1920), who 
evolved one of the most personal styles in the annals of art. 
In contrast to the objective standpoint assumed by Hailde- 
brand and his circle, Klinger’s creations are intensely sub- 
jective. They are crystallizations of his own ideas, and since 
these ideas are peculiar, the resulting statues are to the 
ordinary mind forbiddingly peculiar. His later compositions, 
especially, tend to desperate intricacy, and defy the inter- 
pretative faculties of a normal mentality. A second 
difference from Hildebrand may be discerned in Klinger’s 
addiction to the pictorial and decorative in sculpture. He 
often revealed, particularly in his nudes, an unexpected sense 
of plastic form, but his compositions, multiplication of acces- 
sories, and above all his polychromy are merely a transfer 
of the principles of his paintings into his sculpture. His 
polychromy is the most recherché that we have hitherto 
encountered. Not only did he tint his marbles, but he 
travelled all over Europe in search of stones of strange and 
delicate hues, and with combinations of these in a single 
work he was likely to employ also metals and here and there, 
for accents, as in the eyes, even precious gems. A famous 
instance of his extraordinary conceptions is the Beethoven 
of the Museum at Leipzig. The musician is represented 
as an Olympian Zeus, almost nude, upon a cloud-borne throne, 
before which cowers the eagle and upon the sides of which the 


466 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


fall of man and his spiritual and carnal redemption are 
symbolized by reliefs of Biblical and mythological content. 
The intention was to suggest the fusion of paganism and 
Christianity that Beethoven meant to embody in a tenth 
symphony, as the decorative heads of children incorporate 


FIG. 267—-KLINGER. DRAMA. ALBERTINUM, DRESDEN. (PHOTO. E. A. 
SEEMANN) 


the scherzos. His extraordinary poses may be illustrated by 
the Bathing Maiden of the Leipzig Museum. The employ- 
ment of portraits largely as themes for his own improvisation 
is exemplified by the powerful bust of Liszt in the same 
collection. In his later works, as in the so-called Drama of 
the Albertinum, Dresden (Fig. 267), and the monument to 
Brahms in the Music Hall, Hamburg, the involved grouping 
of the figures and the renunciation of finish at certain points 
are partially due to the influence of Rodin. 


MODERN SCULPTURE 467 


Austria. The most distinguished recent sculptor whom, 
though he was born in Bohemia, Austria has a right to claim 
is Franz Metzner (1870-1919). With him the modern sacri- 
fice of realism to esthetic purposes took the shape of 
an arbitrary treatment of the human form in order to bestow 
upon it architectural lines and to force it into given archi- 
tectural spaces. His attitude was very like that of the 
Romanesque sculptor, except that he exhibited greater 
anatomical knowledge. The glyptic and heroic qualities of 
his style fitted him better than any other to execute the 
adornment of Bruno Schmitz’s architecture, for instance, 
the Rheingold Wine House at Berlin, and, still more impor- 
tant, the Leipzig Monument (cf. Fig. 263). He also de- 
signed, for his own monuments, impressive structures that 
recall Schmitz’s achievements. In the memorial to Stelz- 
hamer at Linz, both the head, as usually in his portraits, 
and even the modern costume are conventionalized into 
architectural lines and masses. 


IV. BELGIUM 
A. THE SCHOOL OF 1850 


It was not until Belgium acquired her independence in 1831 
that her sculptors began to grow restive under an unusually 
debilitated form of neoclassicism. A group of them, who 
attained the maturity of their powers about 1850, struggled 
heavily on towards truth of representation, attaining in 
portrait statues that average of moderate realism which was 
then international. Good examples at Brussels are the Count 
Belhard in the Rue Royale by Guillaume Geefs (1805-1883) 
and the group of Counts Egmont and Hoorn in the Place du 
Petit Sablon by Charles Auguste Fraikin (1817-1893). 


B. THE LATER NINETEENTH CENTURY 


Introductory. Partly because of frequent contact with 
France, but more largely because of the personal genius of a 


468 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


few great innovators, modern Belgian sculpture has achieved 
greater results than were promised by the school of 1850. 
The most tangible quality of the new Belgian school is a 
fresh and emphatic manifestation of the naturalism that had 
always run in Flemish veins. The sculptors of the second 
half of the century may be divided into those who found 
their chief inspiration in this naturalism, and those who, 
though profiting by it, yet were more closely related to the 
group of masters in France who maintained a modernized 
and sensualized classicism or were influenced by the Renais- 
sance. 


The Naturalistic Group 


Meunier. The naturalistic group, influenced doubtless by 
the achievements of the French painter Mullet, preferred to 
find their themes in the life of the lower classes. The first 
few instances began to appear in the early eighties, but such 
subjects did not obtain a definite vogue until they were given 
the stamp of the authority of Constantin Meunier (1831- 
1905), the undisputed protagonist of modern Belgian sculp- 
ture. After a discouraging début in the old academic tradi- 
tion, he forsook sculpture for painting and eventually became 
interested in depicting themes drawn from an observation of 
the intense industrial activity of Belgium. Feeling instinc- 
tively the inadequacy of painting for rendering the work- 
man’s form and perhaps stimulated by the timid beginnings 
of others in such subjects, he returned again in 1885 to 
sculpture, and by his genius justified and popularized the 
cult of labor as an artistic motif throughout the world (Fig. 
268). He discerned better than any other sculptor the 
esthetic values of the laborer’s body, moulded, muscularized, 
made lithe, and hardened by toil; but he ascended far above 
the regions of a literal naturalism and, within certain limits, 
simplified and idealized the workman’s form until it took on 
the lines of an heroic and almost classic beauty. Carrying 
his training as an impressionistic painter into his sculpture, 
he purposely modelled in a rather summary fashion, relying 
for characterization very much upon the general pose and 


469 


MODERN SCULPTURE 


(aa 


Ni 


1dW 


Sa 


ndoove a 


QAIS 


NOW 


AO 


A 


$s 


ALY 


109) 


Sua 


NIW WHHL AO 


NY 


al 


iL 


ay 


qd 


N 


ORC OA 


896 


DIA 


470 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


gestures. In the classes of laborers that he represented. 
costume was already reduced to its lowest terms, a pair of 
light and close-fitting trousers, occasionally accompanied 
by as tight a jerkin or a leathern apron, so that the 
muscular forms are clearly outlined underneath and can be 
treated as if nude. It has often been pointed out that he 
stressed the burden of the 
workman’s lot, and we 
are apt to forget that he 
never neglected to em- 
phasize also the dignity 
of labor, the happiness in 
physical exertion, and the 
strength of character that 
results from honest toil. 
His most congenial me- 
dium was bronze. He 
began with statuettes and 
continued to work at 
times on a small scale for 
the rest of his life; but he 
conceived even these fig- 
ures in a monumental 
mood and often developed 
them afterwards into 
large statues. Despite the 
high merit of his separate 
figures, his greatest work 


FIG. 269—LAMBEAUX. “LA FOLLE CHAN- perhaps is to be sought in 
SON.” AVE. PALMERSTON, BRUSSELS. his reliefs. It was here, 


(FROM “LA SCULPTURE BELGE CONTEM- of course. that his mod- 
PORAINE” BY EGON HESSLING) pean are 
ern pictorial proclivities 
had their fullest play, but in his backgrounds he did not 
indulge in deep pictorial perspective and only indicated 
rather than defined details. Although his preéminence is 
witnessed by the wide distribution of his works in Europe 
and America, the different phases of his production may still 
best be studied in the Museum of Brussels. 
The circle of Meunier. The two Belgian sculptors whose 


MODERN SCULPTURE 471 


production is most analogous to that of Meunier and who 
have apparently been influenced by him are Pierre Braecke 
(b. 1859) and Guillaume Charlier (b. 1854). The former, 
in his representation of laborers and the downtrodden, aims 
at sentimental pathos rather than at esthetic effect. The 
latter may have anticipated Meunier by one or two instances 
of the favorite Belgian themes; but since the series of his 
most typical productions began at about the same time that 
Meunier achieved his first successes, it is likely that he was 
led to continue in this 
vein by the vogue that his 
rival was creating for a 
similar repertoire. His 
most characteristic sub- 
jects are fisher-folk and 
the peasant life of Italy. 
He usually clothes his 
men and women so heav- 
ily that he misses Meu- 
nier’s opportunity for in- 
troducing the interest of 
the nude. Although he 
borders almost always 
upon the pathetic, he is 
less poignant than 
Braecke. 

Other members of the 


group. Naturalism of q j 
FIGc. 270—LAGAE. BUST OF LEON 


quite a different species yrqurme. (FROM “LA SCULPTURE BELGE 
from that championed by conremporaINE” BY EGON HESSLING) 


Meunier and his fellows is 

embodied in the output of Jef Lambeaux (1852-1908). He 
set himself to the task of transferring to sculpture the art 
of the great painters of Antwerp in the seventeenth century, 
Rubens and Jordaens (Fig. 269); and he went far 
beyond the Frenchmen who worked in the same spirit and at 
times beyond Rubens and even Jordaens in the corpulency of 
his feminine forms, in the muscularity of his masculine 
forms, and in the impassioned baroque intricacy of his com- 


472 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


positions. Of plain, straightforward naturalism, unadorned 
either by the idealizations of Meunier or the archaisms of 
Lambeaux, the chief exponent is Jules Lagaé (b. 1862), whose 
most notable contributions have been a long series of vigor- 
ously realistic and direct portrait busts (Fig. 270). 


The Modern Academic Group 


Paul de Vigne (1843-1901) partly owed what advance he 
achieved to his admiration for Rude. Charles van der Stap- 
pen (1843-1910) was more forceftil and original. His nudes 
are more sensual, and as he grew older he accepted more ot 
the naturalistic principles. The group of resting workmen 
called the Builders of Cities in the Pare du Cinquantenaire, 
Brussels, reveals the influence of Meunier. Thomas Vincotte 
(b. 1850) has made a specialty of human or mythological 
figures combined with spirited horses, and in these groups he 
reverts more or less consciously to the style of the French 
seventeenth century. The best known instances are the Horse 
Tamer of the Avenue Louise, Brussels, and (reminiscent of 
Versailles) two groups of Tritons with steeds in the park of 
the royal castle of Ardenne. With the possible exception of 
Lagaé, who is more penetrating in his characterization, he is 
also the most distinguished portraitist that the modern Bel- 
gian school has produced. In his busts, as in the example 
on the memorial to De Nayer at Willebroeck, he casts aside 
his modern classicism and employs a degree of naturalism 
which, in conjunction with a frequent decorative treatment 
of the drapery, recalls the baroque and rococo. Victor Rous- 
seau (b. 1865), although his modes of conception and the 
thoughts contained in his statues are academic, indulges in 
bodies that are more realistic. He has a characteristically 
modern enthusiasm for the nude for its own sake, and, doubt- 
less bewitched by Rodin, he likes to bestow upon it perversely 
eccentric postures. As frank studies of form these works 
would be interesting, for he has much technical skill; but he 
almost spoils them by trying to make them express modern 
abstract ideas that are vague and futile. For instance, he 
creates a group of three love-sick, nude women of different 


MODERN SCULPTURE 473 


ages and dignifies it with the high-sounding title of “Sisters 
of Illusion” (Fig. 271). The nearest that he ever gets to 
sincerity in idea is unfortunately when he is sensual, and 
he often becomes unwholesome in a disagreeable harping 
upon the thought of the birth of passion in youths and 
maidens. 


FIG. 271—vICTOR ROUSSEAU. SISTERS OF ILLUSION. MUSEUM, BRUSSELS. 
(FROM “LA SCULPTURE BELGE CONTEMPORAINE” BY EGON HESSLING) 


Stylization in Belgium 


Of the recent tendency to stylization the chief Belgian 
representative is George Minne (b. 1867). Although he pre- 
serves certain harshly realistic touches and although he 
usually works in small dimensions, he simplifies the human 
form into stiff, architectonic lines, he exaggerates elongation 
and emaciation, and he stresses the Weltschmerz, the general 
sorrow of man’s lot (Fig. 272). It cannot be denied that he 
possesses a kind of power, but, as with Ibsen, it is the power 


474. A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


of the mere presentation of tragedy without the suggestion 
of a remedy or without imparting to his characters, lke 
Meunier, the strength to sustain the burden. His characters 
are morbid mental or physical wrecks of humanity; they are 
not the definite personalities of Meunier’s oppressed laborers 


FIG. 2(2—MINNE. FOUNTAIN. FOLKWANG MUSEUM, HAGEN, WESTPHALIA. 
(PHOTO. DEUTSCHES MUSEUM, HAGEN) 


but generalized types of humanity, often nude. The spirit 
that breathes through his production is the dreamy sadness 
of his compatriot, Maeterlinck. 


V. Irany 


A. THE REBELS AGAINST NEOCLASSICISM 


Perhaps because foreign artists considered Italy a kind of 
vast studio for the absorption of inspiration from the antique, 


MODERN SCULPTURE 475 


the native sculptors did what was expected of them and clung 
to neoclassicism with amazing tenacity. The first of the 
malcontents is traditionally Lorenzo Bartolini (1777-1850) ; 
but he still held largely by the neoclassic style and proved a 
greater champion of naturalism as a preacher than as an 
actual performer. In his group called Charity in the Pitti 
Gallery, Florence, it may be possible to discern something of 
that morbidezza in the rendering of the flesh which he is 
said to have restored to sculpture, and the types of the 
mother and the infant are sufficiently near to the people to 
have displeased the older school. The only really striking 
piece of realism in his output is the recumbent effigy of the 
aged Countess Zamoyska for her tomb in 8. Croce, Florence. 
Although in his portraits he generally eschewed costumes of 
the period in question, the heads are adequate characteriza- 
tions, and occasionally, as 
in the Machiavelli of the 
Portico of the Uffizi, Flor- 
ence, he admitted other 
than Roman garb when its 
romantic nature might con- 
done it. What Bartolini 
barely hinted was defi- 
nitely achieved by Giovan- 
ni Dupré (1817-1882). His 
early statue of the slain 
Abel, now in the Gallery 
of Modern Art, Florence, 
already announces his gos- 
pel of a harmonious fusion 
of the beautiful and the 
real. The lovely Sappho 
in the National Gallery of FIG. 273—VELA. NAPOLEON.  VER- 
Modern Art, Rome, reveals SAILLES. (PHOTO. BRAUN) 

a distinctly naturalistic ad- 

vance in the treatment of the feminine nude. It is in his re- 
ligious sculpture, as in the Pieta of the Cemetery of the 
Misericordia, Siena, that an appreciation of the real and a 
chaste xsthetic sense manifest themselves most attractively 


476 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


in just proportions; and this sculpture has the additional 
charm of issuing from the heart of a fervid believer. Since 
he had little feeling for the monumental, his public statuary, 
as in the case of the Cavour memorial at Turin, is less felici- 
tous. The third stage in the advance to naturalism was 
represented by Vincenzo Vela (1820-1891), but in certain 
respects he overstepped the safety line in this quality and 
led many Italian sculptors after him into the pitfall of verism, 
1.e., a photographic realism. In his most characteristic works, 
the approximation to the actual model and the elaboration of 
minutiz, especially in the costumes, have gone very far, and 
are accentuated, as in the seated Cavour of the Loggia dei 
Banchi, Genoa, by the adoption of casual poses. For nobility 
of imagination and for Dupré’s idealism, he was apt to sub- 
stitute bathos and sentimentality: the relief on the base 
of the monument to Donizetti in S. Maria Maggiore, Ber- 
gamo, represents seven puttt, as symbols of musical notes, 
stricken with grief and breaking their lyres! The best in- 
stance of his occasional penetration beneath a labored super- 
ficial naturalism to the inner character of his subject is the 
seated statue of the dying Napoleon in the Museum at Ver- 
sallles (Fig. 273) 


B. MORE RECENT ITALIAN SCULPTURE 


Introductory. Modern Italian sculpture has been much 
impaired not only by a verism that is partly to be laid at 
Vela’s door but also by a velleity for mere prettiness and 
for cluttering with sweet detail. Another influence in pro- 
voking the unfortunate tendencies has doubtless been the 
incredible virtuosity of the marble-workers at Carrara in 
an almost absolutely illusive rendering of stuffs, laces, 
flowers, and the like. It is, of course, these marble-workers 
or sculptors of an only slightly higher tone .of mind 
who have been the chief sinners and who, commercializing 
their craft, have found a ready market in many parts of the 
world; but even the greatest Italian masters have not always 
kept their skirts free from the failings of Vela and from 


* Replica in the Corcoran Gallery, Washington. 


‘~ 


MODERN SCULPTURE 477 


pettiness. The cemeteries of Italy are crammed with this 
futile statuary, appalling in its sentimentality and strewn 
with accessories too domestic to be included in any esthetic 


FIG. 274—GEMITO. WATER-CARRIER. ROBINSON HALL, HARVARD UNIVERSITY 


system; the most notorious instance is the Campo Santo at 
Genoa. Naples and Turin have probably been the most 
significant centres of modern Italian sculpture. 

Naples. The Neapolitan school is fundamentally natural- 
istic both in its themes, often taken from the wonderful 


478 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


popular life of the city, and 
in its technique, which be- 
trays, however, no particu- 
lar tendency to the veristic 
form assumed by natural- 
ism in Vela and his numer- 
ous imitators. The sculp- 
ture, like the life, of Naples 
has more spontaneity and 
vivacity than depth of 
thought. Of several promi- 
nent masters, the most cele- 
brated is Vincenzo Gemito 
(b. 1852), who has usually 
confined himself to bronze 
statues of small dimen- 
sions. He has shown his 
talent most characteristi- 
cally in representations of 
the nude or semi-nude 
urchins of the Neapolitan 
streets, docks, and coast 
(Fig. 274) and in busts of 
girls of the people. He 
gives in these themes, as in 
all his sculpture, his mo- 
mentary, objective impres- 
sions; but, true Neapolitan, 
he goes no further, not able 
or not caring to elevate his 
work into the realm of 
lofty imagination or 
thought. Like other Nea- 
politans and like so many 
FIG. 275—BISTOLFI. BRIDES OF DEATH. other modern sculptors, he 
yocrimny mob, mascatono. 12ME has een much influenced 

by painting and he seeks 
for effects of chtarescuro rather than of form. Although he 
prefers sketchy surfaces, each of his productions is elaborated 


MODERN SCULPTURE 479 


with a charming delicacy, and the number of his works is 
small. 

Turin. The most criginal and on the whole the best sculp- 
tor of Turin is Leonardo Bistolfi (b. 1859). He is renowned 
chiefly as the introducer of a sad and wistful symbolism into 
the mortuary monuments of Italy, which, even if it were 
false and badly done, would be better than the usual -senti- 
mental photographs in stone. But it is neither false nor 
badly done (Fig. 275). The dimly outlined, mystically 
evanescent, and fluid lines of his forms and their merging into 
one another give the effect of music. Always a painter work- 
ing in marble and bronze, he has a passion for flowers, 
crowding them into his spaces with an Italian taste for pretty 
detail. His influence has been so great that much of the most 
recent Italian sculpture is hardly more than a weak imita- 
tion of his peculiar style of symbolic themes expressed in 
gentle female personifications, flowing and agitated lines, and 
rilievo schiacciato. 

Medardo Rosso. Italy has given birth to one distinguished 
follower of Rodin, Medardo Rosso (b. 1858), who has de- 
veloped pictorial impressionism even to a further point than 
his master. Actually suppressing so far as possible the 
bosses and indentations which were almost the only sculp- 
tural attributes retained by Rodin, he avoids all sharp con- 
trast between planes and passes from one to the other by the 
gentlest transitions. He delights in blurring the outlines 
(taught perhaps in this instance by the French painter Car- 
riére) so that one part of a figure may merge into another 
and the whole figure melt into space. His works are mere 
fragments—a head, a face, the front of a bust—the slight 
and fleeting impressions of the moment; and he prefers 
carrying them no further than the original wax. Well-known 
specimens of his style may be seen in the Gallery of Modern 
Art, Rome, especially the face of a laughing girl, the head 
of a book-maker at the races, and the hazy bust of a woman 
seen on a Parisian boulevard towards evening. 


480 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


VI. Great BRITAIN 
A. INTRODUCTORY 


Great Britain did not effectually shuffle off neoclassicism 
until the beginning of the last quarter of the nineteenth cen- 
tury, and then adopted the universal style of which France 
was the radiating centre. In this more recent sculpture, how- 
ever, the British ethnic type is always unmistakable, and the 
agitated tempo of France is much retarded. The general 
affection for the Quattrocento that actuated European sculp- 
ture in the latter part of the nineteenth century was all the 
more natural to England because of the previous efforts of 
the Pre-Raphaelites in painting. The nearest approach to 
true originality may be sought in a more pronounced sym- 
pathy for the “Arts and Crafts” movement, which has run 
a broader and more successful course in Great Britain than 
elsewhere. English sculptors have not only often turned to the 
production of articles of the minor arts, but they introduce 
jewels, enamels, colored stones, and other materials into their 
large works and cover them with accessories of that highly 
elaborated ornament which is an example of the funda- 
mentally decorative interests of this school. All such 
emphasis upon detail and upon polychromy is part and parcel 
of the pictorial tendency that had marked British sculpture 
even from Gothic times. 


B. THE BREAK WITH NEOCLASSICISM 


The first master to grow restless under the restrictions of 
neoclassicism and to approximate moderate realism in por- 
traiture was the Irishman John Henry Foley (1818-1874), 
whose achievements, however, did not equal those of hi$s 
continental contemporaries. Alfred Stevens (1817-1875) was 
an isolated phenomenon, whose very few works were apart 
from the customary style of this period of English sculp- 
ture. In a modern sense of beauty, in composition, and 
in imaginative conception, if not in realism, he had few rivals 


MODERN SCULPTURE 481 


of his own age in Europe. Largely self-taught, he remained 
impervious to neoclassicism and anticipated the general 
European return to enthusiasm for the Renaissance. While 
maintaining his own originality, he imitated Raphael and 
especially Michael Angelo and looked forward to the achieve- 
ment of the French sculptor, Paul Dubois. His attainments 
as a sculptor can now best be studied in the crouching carya- 


FIG. 276—STEVENS. CARYATIDES. DORCHESTER HOUSE, LONDON. (COUR- 
TESY OF THE TATE GALLERY) 


tides of a mantelpiece in Dorchester House, London (Fig. 
276), and in the mausoleum of the Duke of Wellington in 
St. Paul’s cathedral. 


C. MANIPULATORS OF THE MORE MODERN STYLE 


The first lines of a new and definite sculptural communica- 
tion between the island and the continent were established in 
the sixties by the Austrian Sir Joseph Edgar Boehm (1834- 
1890), whose forte was realistic portraiture, and in the seven- 
ties by the long exile of Dalou at London. 


482 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Brock, Wood, and Thornycroft. The most prominent 
sculptor of the old school elastic enough to profit by the 
novelties was Sir Thomas Brock (b. 1847). He has attained 
tremendous popularity as a portraitist who will always give | 
satisfaction by the combination, in his busts or figures, of a 
high degree of faithfulness to life with a suitable conception 
and execution, and who will never shock English sensibility 
by an esthetic or imaginative extravagance. Although not 
highly endowed with poetic 
invention, he compensates 
by a strong sense of truly 
sculptural monumentality, 
gained often in his portrait 
statues, as in the Gladstone 
of Westminster Abbey, by 
enveloping them in the 
robes of their office and by 
a large and simple manipu- 
lation of the folds. Like all 
English sculptors of the 
period, he has done his 
stint of representations of 
Queen Victoria, the most 
accessible among which is 
the seated effigy of the 
great National Memorial in 
front of Buckingham Pal- 


ace, accompanied by nu- 
FIG. 277—-THORNYCROFT. TEUCER. TATE 1] alae ‘ 
GALLERY, LONDON merous a egori1ca gures. 


Derwent Wood (b. 1871), 
who was once Brock’s assistant, is shown by his statue of 
the elder Pitt in the National Gallery, Washington, to be 
a keener portraitist. In other words, belonging to the 
younger generation, he has gradually adopted the more un- 
conditioned realism of modern days. His Dancer at Bur- 
lington House, London, is one of his characteristic feminine 
nudes, which vie in the frankness of their naturalism with 
the figures of Bartholomé and Landowski. Brock had been 
preceded in the adoption of the new style by Sir W. Hamo 


MODERN SCULPTURE 483 


Thornycroft (b. 1850), who had never owed any special 
allegiance to the old school. He is a classicist only in the 
sense in which the word can be applied to such sculptors 
as Chapu: the mythological themes and suggestions from the 
antique are treated in a modern way. His Teucer in the 
Tate Gallery (Fig. 277), for instance, is modelled with that 
fresher realism and _ that 
imaginative force which 
distinguish his production 
from that of Brock. In the 
Mower of 1884 (Liverpool 
Gallery) and the Sower of 
1886, he even anticipated 
with unexpected closeness 
Meunier’s popularization of 
the semi-nude workman. 
The Dean Colet of St. 
Paul’s School, London, is a 
good example of his staid 
but lifelike portraiture. 
Watts. The sculpture of 
the painter, George Fred- 
erick Watts (1817-1904), | 
because of a pictorialism 
almost equal to that of 
Rodin, seems amazingly 
more modern in style than 
the work of even his 
younger English rivals. 
His two superb equestrian 
figures, the Hugh Lupus in ric. 278—warrs. PHYSICAL ENERGY. 
front of Eaton Hall near KENSINGTON GARDENS, LONDON 
Chester and the Physical 
Energy in Kensington Gardens, London (Fig. 278), look as 
if they had just ridden out of a painting, and the large planes 
as well as the small bosses are calculated as a mesh to entrap 
the light and shade. The principal attraction of his sculp- 
ture, as of his pictures, is an imaginative originality and an 
ability to express this originality powerfully. _ 


484 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Drury. The Englishman who succumbed most completely 
to the influence of Dalou was Alfred Drury (b. 1859). 
Many sculptors among his compatriots of the last half cen- 
tury have been little more than interpreters, to their country- 
men, of the Parisian cult of the nude; and Drury, though he 
has distinctly more force and somewhat more originality, is 
their chief representative. He has a Frenchman’s ability to 
turn to any subject that is ordered from him, by his facile 
technique always to please his patrons, and occasionally to 
approximate a masterpiece. He has affected a rather robust 
type of femininity, as in the Circe of the City Art Gallery, 
Leeds, and he has clung to the long sweeping expanses of 
Dalou’s baroque draperies thrown into a few largely con- 
ceived and vigorously projecting folds.. The plastic adorn- 
ment of the New War Office, London, is. one of many in- 
stances in, which he has been called upon-to employ the 
French style for the decoration of squares and buildings. His 
portrait statues, such as the Dr. Priestley in City Square, 
Leeds, and his busts are distinguished performances. ‘The 
Griselda of the Tate Gallery is one of several examples of 
tender, ideal busts of young girls, the production of which he 
has chosen as an avocation. | 

Ford. E. Onslow Ford (1852-1901) inaugurated his career 
in a rather exceptional way by studying under Wagmiller 
at Munich. It was here perhaps that he gained’ the stimulus 
that caused him to conform to the general pictorial tendency 
of British sculpture. At home the influence of the Arts and 
Crafts movement showed itself particularly in the decora- 
tion of his pedestals. Like Drury, he worked upon every 
kind of commission that the conditions of the nineteenth 
century provided, and in all of them he satisfies but does 
not thrill the spectator. The category of commemorative 
portraiture is well represented by the Queen Victoria at Man- 
chester; the busts, by the General Gordon in the Abbey; 
mausoleums, at Oxford, by the Jowett Memorial in Balliol 
College, in the manner of the Renaissance, and by the cen- 
otaph of Shelley in University College, which foreshadows 
Gilbert’s highly peculiar, ornate, and symbolical creations. 
The Egyptian Singer and the Folly of the Tate Gallery be- 


MODERN SCULPTURE 485 


long to a series of youthful feminine nudes, his most indi- 
vidualistie productions, whose charm is only slightly and 
occasionally impaired by their too boyish anatomy. 


D. THE SCULPTORS OF THE ARTS AND CRAFTS MOVEMENT 


The chief sponsor of the typically English union of sculp- 
ture with the minor arts is Alfred Gilbert (b. 1854). His 


FIG. 279—GILBERT. DETAIL OF TOMB OF DUKE OF CLARENCE. ST. GEORGE’S 
CHAPEL, WINDSOR. (COURTESY OF MR. GILBERT) 


Perseus + is one of three statuettes of nude youths which show 
how he began by paying homage to the Renaissance; and 
he has continued to the end to feel himself a Florentine sculp- 
tor-goldsmith. He prefers bronze and in this medium expresses 
himself more satisfactorily. Much of his time he has gladly 


* Replica in the Metropolitan Museum, New York. 


486 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


devoted to small, figured objects belonging exclusively to the 
minor arts, but even in his larger monuments decoration by 
pure design and by statuettes is employed to such an extent 
as to constitute a peculiarity. The two most important 
instances are the memorial to Victoria at Winchester and 
the tomb of the Duke of Clarence in St. George’s Chapel, 
Windsor (Fig. 279). It 
might be supposed that his 
interest in the meticulous 
though lovely elaboration 
of detail would stand in the 
way of any adequate con- 
ception of the whole or in 
the way of spiritual values; 
but although Gilbert’s style 
is always more pictorial 
than sculptural, he _ pos- 
sesses great powers of 
large, original, and even 
poetic imagination and a 
superior sensitiveness to 
beauty of form and line. 
The one deterrent to a 
complete enjoyment of his 
achievements is that, a vic- 
tim of the modern passion 
for far-fetched symbolism, 
FIG. 280—FRAMPTON. DAME ALICE he has chosen the acces- 
OWEN. OWEN SCHOOL, ISLINGTON é 5 
LONDON. (COURTESY OF MR. Rk. F. sories for symbolical rea- 
CHOLMELEY) sons that are rather pro- 
saic. The reredos of St. 
Alban’s cathedral is an instance of the manner in which his 
unique conceptions sometimes border on the eccentric. 

The master who stands closest to Gilbert in the accommo- 
dation of sculpture to the Arts and Crafts movement is Sir 
George J. Frampton. (b. 1860). His hobby has been poly- 
chrome sculpture, which ordinarily means with him a 
combination of different materials in a single figure or monu- 
ment, such as ivory, marble, and bronze; and he has fre- 


MODERN SCULPTURE 487 


quently turned to themes from the Middle Ages and Renais- 
sance, to which polychromy was chronologically suited (Fig. 
280). His most beloved achievement, the Peter Pan of Ken- 
sington Gardens, stands on a pedestal that recalls Gilbert’s 
ornate compositions. Few names in modern British sculpture 
are deservedly ranked so high; and yet, perhaps because he 
is one of the most prolific of artists, he has neither taken 
the time to attain such distinction in technique as Gilbert nor 
found the leisure necessary for the play of so poetic a fancy 
as that of his rival. 


E. STYLIZATION IN ENGLAND 


Though an American by birth, Jacob Epstein (b. 1880) is 
identified with the English aspects of the most recent de- 
velopments in sculpture. He harks back to the primitive less 
often and less emphatically than. Mestrovié or Manship, and 
when he does, as in his Christ, the head of his wife, or the 
tomb of Oscar Wilde in Pére Lachaise, it is rather Egyptian 
art that he has in mind. Sometimes he is even so old- 
fashioned (as to adopt the broken, highly shaded surfaces 
of Rodin. Usually, with no archaic models very definitely in 
mind, his method is little more than a simplification and over- 
statement in order to gain his effects. Some of his best work 
is a mere intensification of telling traits in portraiture. 


VII. Spain 


Introductory. During the first half of the nineteenth cen- 
tury, the few men who essayed the typical moderate realism 
of the epoch in portraiture did not rise above the level of 
second-rate provincials. The new and fresher style, which, 
as elsewhere in Europe, was evolved in the latter half of the 
nineteenth century, was a reflection of Parisian fashions, and 
except for a very occasional and factitious reversion to the 
polychrome statuary of the seventeenth century, native char- 
acteristics were, for Spain, strangely indistinct. It was often 
not the genuine French manner that the Spaniards absorbed 
but rather its modifications in Italy. A verism like that of 
Italy, indeed, has often infected Spanish mortuary art. 


488 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


The modern masters. The prophet of the new style, prob- 
ably through French inspiration, was Ricardo -Bellver (b. 
1845), whose achievements definitely signalize in Spain the 
transfer of allegiance from the models of antiquity to those 
of the Renaissance. His two great mausoleums, of the Cardi- 
nal Lastra in the cathedral of Seville and of the Cardinal 
Siliceo in the cathedral of Toledo are based in structure, or- 
nament, and elegance upon sepulchral precedents of the Span- 
ish sixteenth century. The Fallen Angel of the Park of the 
Buen Retiro, Madrid, and 
his religious works show 
that he very definitely 
cast his lot also with the 
general resurrection of the 
baroque. a 

Agustin Querol (1863- 
-1909) achieved an inter- 
national reputation 
through consciously strug- 
gling for the unusual and 
catering to the modern 
taste for extreme realism 
rather than through any 
intellectual or technical 
superiority to his Spanish 
rivals. The group of Tra- 
dition in the Museum of 
Modern Art, Madrid, an 
old woman instructing 


FIG. 281—BLAY. LABORERS ON MoNnu- two children, is perhaps 
MENT TO CHAVARRI. BILBAO. (FROM the most celebrated exam- 


ate EN MADRID” BY E. SERRANO ple of his realism. One of 
his most singular excur- 
sions into the field of the unusual is the whole pseudo-mystic 
conception of the tomb of Antonio Cénovas in the Panteén 
de Atocha, Madrid, which suggests the sepulchral ideas and 
methods of the contemporary Italian, Bistolfi. 
Miguel Blay (b. 1866) has more skill, true originality, and 
real life, and at the same time he belongs by his conceptions 


MODERN SCULPTURE 489 


to more recent developments in art. His “Eclosién” in the 
Museum of Modern Art, Madrid, embodies the typically 
modern concept of the unfolding of the sexual instinct. The 
portrait group of Senora de Iturbe and her daughter in the 
family’s residence at Madrid is like an enlargement of some 
work of Troubetzkoi. But it is his predilection for figures 
of laborers, as on the monument to Chavarri at Bilbao (Fig. 
281), that most conclusively classifies him with the dernier 
crt. He treats them with an almost photographic realism 
and fails to elicit from their forms the beauty that Meunier | 
discerned. For his 
statue of St. Francis 
Solano at Santiago 
del Estero in the Ar- 
gentine Republic, his 
realistic proclivities 
led him to revert to 
the national style of 
the seventeenth cen- 
tury. 

The most cele- 
brated name of the 
younger generation 
is perhaps that of ric. 282—ciarA. “pIvINITY.” (COURTESY OF 
José Clara (b. 1878), See Boe 
a pupil of Rodin. He 
has adopted his master’s cult of form for form’s sake, but his 
feminine nudes make it clear that, as in the case of Lan- 
dowski and Derwent Wood, it is rather the extreme natural- 
ism of Rodin’s first period that has interested him (Fig. 282). 
Now and then he exhibits a potent influence of Greek sculp- 
ture of the fifth century. 


VIII. ScANDINAVIA 


Modern Scandinavian seulpture has adhered closely to the 
artistic trends of the great European centres, especially 
Paris, but at the same time has impregnated its productions 
with a considerable amount of indigenous feeling. Inevitably 


490 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the first generation of sculptors after Thorvaldsen in Norway, 
Sweden, and Denmark did little else than attempt to repeat 
his achievements. The next development was the adoption 
of the moderate realism generally prevalent in Europe about 
1850. Of the new Parisian style of the second half of the 
nineteenth century, the chief representative was Stephan 
Sinding (1846-1922), a Norwegian by birth but a Dane by 
citizenship. The Frenchmen who most influenced him were 
’  Falguiére and particularly 
Ernest Barrias (1841- 
1905). The critic Bigeon 
has pointed out that Sin- 
ding in his maturity incor- 
porated two different in- 
terests in his works, human 
sorrow. and the feminine 
nude. It is especially in 
the former phase that one 
senses the Scandinavian 
note. Sometimes, as in his 
celebrated equestrian Val- 
kyr, in Langelinie Park, 
Copenhagen, he even 
turned to Norse mythology. 
His other interest does not 
seem to the present writer 
Hae so much the feminine nude, 
a, 285 SIGBLAND. SECTION OF FOUN: 4s the “problem!” of Sex 
THE AMERICAN SCANDINAVIAN FouN- for he ordinarily groups a 
DATION ) masculine with a feminine 
nude, and, like Victor 
Rousseau and Blay, morbidly stresses the first budding of 
love in youth. Impressionism has been represented, in a 
manner resembling that of Troubetzkoi, by the Swede, Carl 
Milles (b. 1875), and, in a manner resembling that of Rodin, 
by the Norwegian, Gustav Vigeland (b. 1869). Indeed, it is 
perhaps not too much to say that the works of Vigeland’s first 


MODERN SCULPTURE 491 


period, such as the many amorous groups, the bronze relief of 
Hell in the National Gallery at Christiania, and the monu- 
ment to the mathematician Abel in the same city, reveal him 
as the most faithful and at the same time the most gifted of 
Rodin’s followers. The cult of eccentric posture, the slimness 
and litheness of form, the pictorialism, the extreme natural- 
ism in the nude and in gripping portraiture, the passionate in- 
tensity, the modern eroticism,—all these qualities are manip- 
ulated by the Norwegian disciple with almost as great dis- 
tinction as by the French master; and yet a certain rugged- 
ness, an individual- 
ity of type, a north- 
ern gloom of senti- 
ment, bestow upon 
Vigeland’s produc- 
tions an_ indelible 
original and Scandi- 
navian character. in 
parts, however, of 
his most recent com- 
mission, the foun- 
tain for the space 
in front of the royal 
palace at  Christi- 
ania (which, when 
completed, will con- — yy¢, 284—rRoUBETZKOI. ‘TOLSTOI. DETROIT IN- 
stitute, with its STITUTE oF ARTS. (COURTESY OF DETROIT IN- 
scores of groups and = STITUTE oF arts) 

figures, one of the most colossal sculptural enterprises of 
modern times), he has partially forsaken the manner of 
Rodin, and, while always retaining his originality, has 
adopted something of the primitive simplifications and solid- 
ity of Maillol or even Archipenko. In the delightful bronze 
forms in the midst of the sculptured trees and in their atti- 
tudes (Fig. 283), the influence of Rodin is still evident, and 
the more sculptural style properly shows itself especially in 
the more ponderous stone of the outermost groups on the 
monument. 


492 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


TX. Russia 


The more modern phase of European sculpture has been ex- 
emplified by a Russian of great distinction, Prince Paul 
Troubetzkoi (b. 1866). A thorough cosmopolitan, he was 
born and trained in Italy and has resided at Moscow and 
Paris. He adopts a mild form of Rodin’s pictorial impres- 
sionism, and carries to an extreme the tendency to preserve 
in the finished bronze the rough texture of the clay model. 
He stands at the head of the whole group of sculptors in 
various countries whose most characteristic works are small 
sketches recording momentary impressions of persons and 
things. In his attitude towards art he has been very much 
influenced by Tolstoi; in its practice he has revealed high 
gifts of keen observation, vividness, force of expression, and 
crispness of style. Among his statuettes of various themes, it 
is perhaps his portraits (Fig. 284) that have won most 
applause. 


X. JUGOSLAVIA 


The Jugoslav representative of stylization is Ivan Mes-_ 
trovié (b. 1883). He has taken his stand with the group who 
have sought to make the technical knowledge and content of 
modern art conform to the mould of archaic Greek sculpture 
(Fig. 285). Like Maillol he aims at glyptic bulk, and like 
Manship, at decorative composition; yet, the chief intention 
of his simplifications and conventionalizations often seems 
to be primitive brute force. The contemporary whom he 
most suggests is his teacher, Metzner, especially in the be- 
stowal of architectural lines upon the body; but the latter’s — 
models are rather Romanesque, whereas those of MeSstrovié 
are Hellenic. He has gained the reputation of an exponent of 
an essentially Jugoslav zsthetic tendency. His themes are 
often a glorification of Jugoslav history, such as the sculp- 
tures for his projected temple to commemorate the Battle 
of Kossovo; but there is nothing distinctive in the forms or 
methods to label them as Jugoslav, unless Mestrovié would 
have us believe that the fierceness of his style reflects a 


MODERN SCULPTURE 493 


Jugoslav barbarism. His portraits, such as the Rodin, he 
hacks more or less into the same rugged, formal designs. 
His numerous religious sculptures, often in wood, are in- 
tensified modernizations of Byzantine prototypes in the same 
way as his secular figures are adaptations from the ancient 
Greek. Although, in his whole production, like the others 


FIG. 285—-MESTROVIC. THE MAIDEN OF KOSSOVO. (COURTESY OF MR. 
MESTROVIC) 


who have resurrected the primitive, he exaggerates the 
idiosyncrasies of his models, he succeeds as well as, if not 
better than, any of his rivals in the coveted decorative and 
emotional effects, and undeniably realizes his purpose of 
rude power. 


494 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


XI. THe UNITED STATES 
A. THE TRANSITION FROM NEOCLASSICISM TO MODERNISM 


1. Introductory 


Until about the time of the Centennial of 1876, American 
sculptural aspirants did not cease to get their training, espe- 
cially for ideal themes, from the tradition of Canova and 
Thorvaldsen in Italy. More and more, however, the progres- 
sive masters and to a lesser extent the conservatives began 
to rely upon their own inspiration, particularly for portraits, 
and they approximated the moderate realism generally char- 
acteristic of European sculpture in the first half of the 
nineteenth century. The peculiar nature and costume of 
the celebrities whom they were called upon to portray was 
already forming something like a separate American tradition 
in sculpture. The passions of the Civil War gave rise to 
themes more truly felt and essentially national than the 
mythological or related artificialities of neoclassicism. A 
distinctive type of Soldiers’ and Sailors’ monument was 
evolved, apparently without French influence, consisting of 
a lofty and massive base crowned by some such allegorical 
figure as Victory or Liberty and with other allegorical per- 
sonifications and statues of soldiers and sailors ranged at 
lower levels. 


2. The Progressives 


The early neoclassic pieces of Henry Kirke Brown of New 
York (1814-1886) gave but fittle promise of his really inter- 
esting work as a conscientious portraitist. His standing 
portraits, such as the Lincoln in Union Square, New York, are 
less important than his equestrian figures, among which the 
Washington of the same square is an almost inspired con- 
ception (Fig. 286). Thomas Ball of Boston (1819-1911), in 
his portraits, manifested less feeling than Brown for that 
vague thing which we call “style.” It is curious that his 
masterpiece, also, should have been an equestrian figure, the 
Washington of the Public Garden, Boston. In representing 


MODERN SCULPTURE 495 


personages of less remote times, like Brown in his Lincoln, 
Ball sought to offset the prose of modern costume by the 
poetic mantle. Rather unexpectedly, he revealed in gentle, 
idealistic productions something of that imagination which 
he seems partially to lack in his standing portraits. The 
group of the Genius of Death unveiling the personification 


FIG. 286—BROWN. WASHINGTON. UNION SQUARE, NEW YORK. (COURTESY 
OF ART COMMISSION, CITY OF NEW YORK) 


of Faith for the Chickering monument in Mount Auburn 
Cemetery, Cambridge, is an expression of a mild, Victorian 
fancy that is not unpleasant. His pupil, Martin Milmore 
(1844-1883), was a sculptor of less renown but greater gifts. 
Cut off in the flower of his promise, he has never received 
his due meed of honor as an artist who, with little to guide 
him but his own instinct, forestalled the esthetic develop- 
ments of the subsequent generation. It is true that he is 


496 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


generally given the credit of having established the vogue 
of the typical Soldiers’ and Sailors’ monument by the success 
of the specimen that he erected in the Boston Common in 
1874. But he makes greater demands upon our recognition 
than this. He anticipated Saint-Gaudens in at least two 
respects. In what to others were arid themes, commemo- 
rative statues of northern soldiers and sailors, he par- 
tially broke through the customary hard style of the period 
by his feeling for surfaces and by extracting a certain beauty 
even from the forbidding 
costume of coat and 
trousers; and he had a 
sense of grave poetry that 
is well illustrated by the 
angel of the Coppenhagen 
monument in Mount Au- 
burn (Hig S s237) seem ce 
greater impress of the 
artist’s personality that ap- 
pears in the production of 
Ball and Milmore as com- 
pared with the ordinary 
neoclassic output is found 
likewise in the work of 
Erastus D. Palmer of Al- 
bany (1817-1904), above 


all in his Angel at the Sep- 
FIG. 287—-MILMORE. CGPPENHAGEN 


MONUMENT. MOUNT AUBURN Gein) lemme in Albany Cemetery. 
TERY, CAMBRIDGE, MASS. The White Captive of the 


Metropolitan Museum ex- 
hibits nee his other contribution to the development of 
American sculpture, a more truthful and warmer treatment 
of the feminine nude. 

Ward. John Quincy Adams Ward (1830-1910) was some- 
what affected by the advance of American sculpture subse- 
quent to the Centennial, particularly in a very occasional 
and slight predilection for pictorial surfaces; but, broadly 
speaking, his art belongs to the earlier,transitional period, 
of which it is usually deemed the best product. A pupil of 


MODERN SCULPTURE 497 


Brown for seven years, he was wholly trained in this country, 
and rightly boasted that his art was essentially American. 
He scouted altogether the mythologies of neoclassicism, and 
his few idealistic subjects, such as the Indian Hunter of 
Central Park, New York, are inspired by our own history 
and culture. If we may arrogate to ourselves a sturdier 
manliness than other nations, then Ward was American in 


FIG. 288—WARD. WASHINGTON. SUB-TREASURY, NEW YORK. (PHOTO. 
BOGART ) 


his strong masculinity. He consistently avoided the adven-_ 
titious, the pretty, and the affected; he sought a general 
monumentality rather than delicacy of execution; he was 
satisfied with the great simple lines of quiet postures and 
gestures. He may be studied at his best in the Garfield 
memorial at Washington, in the Beecher monument at Brook- 
lyn, and in the Washington on the steps of the Sub-Treasury, 


498 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


New York (Fig. 288), perhaps the noblest setting forth of 
this frequent American theme. 

Rimmer. In the judgment of certain critics, William 
Rimmer of Boston (1816-1879) more than disputes Ward’s 
preeminence in the transitional period. This opinion de- 
serves consideration if for no other reason than because it has 
recently been championed 
by one of our greatest liv- 
ing sculptors, Gutzon Bor- 
glum, who has sought to 
rescue him from oblivion 
by the most unqualified 
superlatives of praise. Self- 
trained, an eccentric of 
enigmatic ancestry, the cre- 
ator of but a few pieces of 
sculpture, painter, lecturer 
on artistic anatomy, and 
physician as well, he cer- 
tainly stood quite apart 
from the plastic tradition 
of his time. Like Milmore, 
he anticipated later artistic 
developments. Borglum 
has compared him to Ro- 
din at Rodin’s best; and 
whether or not we accept 
this dictum in regard to a 

: man who produced so little 

FIG. 289—RIMMER. FALLING GLADIA- ; : 
TOR. MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS, BOSTON and in whom sheer genius 
cannot quite hide the short- 
comings of defective training and environment, it must be 
acknowledged that his work presents many analogies to the 
French master’s achievement. His Falling Gladiator (Fig. 
289) and Dying Centaur in the Boston Museum and espe- 
cially his many drawings reveal the same interest in form in 
curious postures for form’s sake, and he also was able to 
maintain, as particularly in the Fighting Lions of the Boston 
Art Club, a wonderful concentration of composition. Even 


MODERN SCULPTURE 499 


so phenomenally youthful a work as the figure of Despair 
in the Boston Museum, a strangely direct ancestor of Rodin’s 
Thinker, shows that his naturalism prophesied the twentieth 
century: it was thought that the Gladiator, like Rodin’s Age 
of Bronze, was merely a cast from a living model. But he 
was able to pour into his creations a spiritual content, often 
bespeaking, as in the case of Rodin, an inner strife of his 
own emotions. With Rimmer it was the struggle for exist- 
ence, the many disappointments at lack of appreciation and 
of opportunity for the development of his gifts, the hopeless 
effort of a great nature to express itself in a cramped atmos- 
phere. The head of St. Stephen in the Boston Museum is the 
most astounding example of his embodiment of anguish. His 
power of expression is extraordinary even in other fields: 
not even Barye has attained the fierceness of his Fighting 
Lions. The statue of Alexander Hamilton on Common- 
wealth Avenue, Boston, is a typical instance of the way in 
which, like Max Klinger, he always made his productions 
erystallizations of his own unusual ideas and conceived each 
commission in an absolutely individual manner. 


3. The Italianates 


The conservative sculptors of the transitional period do 
not vary much, one from the other, in their manipulation of 
the neoclassic style. William Wetmore Story (1819-1895) 
was clever enough to choose from the classical repertoire a 
vein that appealed to Victorian taste, sorrowing females of 
the kind represented by his ee and Medea of the 
Metropolitan Museum. In his portrait statues, which inevi- 
tably lack the strength of Brown, Ball, and Ward, he had a 
predilection for men whom he could drape in flowing gowns, 
such as the statue of his father, Chief Justice Story, in the 
vestibule of the Mount Auburn Chapel. Randolph Rogers 
(1825-1892) tried his hand with tolerable results at the 
several kinds of sculpture popular at the time, but all his 
many productions suffer from a blight of dullness. Yet he 
has a place in American annals as the author of the bronze 


500 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


doors for the Rotunda of the Capitol, Washington. If, in 
distinction from Crawford, he had not been so unwise as 
to provoke by imitation a 
comparison with Ghiberti, 
the absence of any highly 
developed artistic quality 
might be condoned and the 
doors accepted for their 
clearly told stories and for 
the romantic characters 
embodied in the statuettes; 
but even as it 1s and even 
from the purely esthetic 
standpoint, they are better 
than the ordinary critic 
will admit. William H. 
Rinehart of Maryland 
(1825-1874) is not only 
superior to the others of his 
coterie in every technical 
aspect, but he shows more 
refinement and warmth in 


FIG. 290—RINEHART. CLYTIE. PEA- : 
BODY INSTITUTE, BALTIMORE. (COUR- the use of the human body 


TESY OF THE PEABODY INSTITUTE) as a vehicle of plastic ex- 
pression. In the Clytie 


(Fig. 290), a feminine nude, the naturalism just falls short 
of the more modern treatment by Palmer. 


B. THE MODERN PERIOD 
1. General Characteristics 


Lorado. Taft-has demonstrated that about the time of the 
Centennial of 1876 the whole nature of sculpture in the United 
States was changed. America was drawn into the surge of 
the more modern style that had already gained force in 
France and Germany and was then spreading to the other 


MODERN SCULPTURE 501 


countries of Kurope. Turning from Italy to France, vir- 
tually all of our sculptors now obtained their training largely 
or partly in Paris. Some of them used the Parisian elements 
as contributory material out of which to build an essentially 
American school; others, while tinging their borrowings with 
some degree of Americanism, imitated more closely the styles 
of France. What they acquired in particular was not only 
a much greater technical facility than the old school but also 
a predilection for the broken surfaces of the new pictorial 
style. It does not seem likely that the rather meagre exhibit 
of foreign sculpture in the new style at the Centennial could 
have had much to do with stimulating the desire for emula- 
tion. Certain of our sculptors, such as Warner and Saint- 
Gaudens, had already inaugurated the practice of studying 
at Paris, and perhaps the whole modern sculptural movement 
in America should be largely ascribed to the precedent of 
their initiative. The last quarter of the nineteenth century, 
moreover, witnessed, in this country, a general elevation of 
culture and taste. Another reason for the development of an 
indigenous movement was the higher sense of nationality that 
resulted from the reassertion of unity after the Civil War. 
The most distinctive qualities of American sculpture are its 
moderation and seriousness of purpose. Little patronage has 
been afforded to ideal sculpture as an end in itself, that is, 
ideal sculpture not designed for decoration of monuments, 
except in the case of “exposition sculpture”; and even the 
greater part of this has been done by foreign craftsmen. Now 
and again there crops out in American sculpture that senti- 
mentality which Europeans, with their false conceptions of 
our materialism, will never believe lies at the foundation of 
the American character. Not only the portraits but also the 
ideal figures reflect the national ethnic type, which unhappily 
lacks the clean-cut definiteness of feature that is the heritage 
of purer races. One of the peculiar virtues of our native 
school, largely due to the great influence of Saint-Gaudens, 
has been a stronger tendency than elsewhere to construct 
emphasized architectural settings, especially exedras, for com- 
memorative figures. 


502 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 
2. The First Generation 


The More American Group 


Warner. Olin Levi Warner (1844-1896) may be assigned 
to the more American group because his imaginative figures 
as well as his portraits already conform to our ethnic type, 
and he may be considered first because, although he studied 
at Paris at the same time as Saint-Gaudens, he was four 
years his senior. Even from the standpoint of absolute 
esthetic merit, were it not for Saint-Gaudens, one would be 
hard put to it to discover another who more justly deserves 
the place of honor. Without descending to neoclassic 
plagiarism, he exemplified both the feeling for physical beauty 
and the moderation of antiquity, retaining vague reminis- 
cences of Hellenic loveliness of line and form. He modelled 
with conscientious exactitude, but he never sacrificed a proper 
sculptural monumentality to realistic detail. Huis portraits, 
such as the Garrison on Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, al- 
though vivid embodiments of individualities, are never lack- 
ing in a Greek emphasis upon the beauty of spiritual char- 
acteristics. Huis art has been compared to that of his French 
contemporary, Chapu, and it is possible that the pose of his 
best feminine nude, the Diana, was suggested by Chapu’s 
Jeanne d’Arc. Studying when he did at Paris, he was bound 
to be somewhat influenced also by the Renaissance. His 
most precious legacy from the fifteenth century was the art 
of delicate bas-relief, which he vied with Saint-Gaudens in 
recovering for the United States. The various aspects of 
his achievement are perhaps most readily appreciated in his 
bronze doors for the Congressional Library, symbolizing the 
idea of Tradition (Fig. 291). 

Saint-Gaudens. The most generally representative and, on 
the whole, the greatest American sculptor was Augustus 
Saint-Gaudens (1848-1907). Born at Dublin, Ireland, of a 
French father and an Irish mother, he was brought by his 
family as an infant to New York. His period of study 
abroad, at Paris and in Italy, extended: from the years 1867 
to 1875. In coming from French art to Saint-Gaudens, per- 


FIG. 291—WARNER. BRONZE DOORS. CONGRESSIONAL LIBRARY, WASHING- 
TON. (PHOTO. L. C. HANDY) 


503 


504 A,HISTORY OF SCULPIVRS 


haps the thing that strikes one as most American is his 
sobriety. Even those figures which are represented in move- 
ment, such as the Deacon Chapin_at Springfield, Mass., and 
the equestrian Sherman on Fifth Avenue, New York, have 
what we like to think is an American staidness. This 
sobriety, however, does not mean either that his modelling 
is dry or that his figures are dead. He possessed the incom- 
parable gift of pouring such life into his most static figures 
that even the best of what had gone before in American sculp- 
ture seems torpid by contrast. Not only are his portraits 
among the most gripping characterizations of modern times, 
but the poise which is among his most precious American 
traits enabled him to soften their realism by evoking from 
the subject as much sedate poetry as possible and by de- 
veloping still further Ward’s ability to make the subject 
representative of an epoch or movement. The poetry of his 
nature emerges more clearly in his idealistic figures, which 
are discreetly adapted to the American conception of feminine 
beauty—gravely sweet poetry in the Amor Caritas of the 
Luxembourg, more serious and solemn in the mysterious 
brooding and mourning woman leaning against the monument 
of Mrs. Henry Adams in Rock Creek Cemetery, Washington. 
Although his temperance kept him, like Warner, from the 
audacious chiaroscuro of Carpeaux, his modelling is mildly 
pictorial. It is particularly in low relief that he inclines to a 
moderate impressionism, elaborating only the significant lines 
and planes and merely indicating the others broadly. Per- 
haps we may claim, without conceit, that his hostility to any 
meretricious appeals is American. Above all, in his long 
series of great portraits of our fellow-countrymen, he brought 
vividly forth what are traditionally the highest American 
characteristics—a simple nobility and hardihood, the rough 
naturalness that belongs to a young nation, the curious 
fusion of reticence and frankness. The apotheosis of this new 
type of manhood that Saint-Gaudens introduced into the art 
of the world is the standing Lincoln of Lincoln Park, Chicago 
(Fig. 292). 

He was so much of an innovator that he might almost be 
said to have created modern American sculpture. He col- 


FIG. 292—-SAINT-GAUDENS. LINCOLN. LINCOLN PARK, CHICAGO. (COUR- 
TESY OF MR. J. H. POWERS) 


005 


506 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


laborated with the architect Stanford White in evolving a 
new kind of base, an exedra from the centre of which rises 
the statue; the earliest example is the Farragut of Madison 
Square, New York. In such works as the memorials to Bel- 
lows in All Souls Unitarian Church, New York, and to 
Stevenson in the cathedral of Edinburgh, he popularized an- 
other type of monument in which the effigy appears in high 
or low relief against a background decorated with ornamental 
detail, especially lettering. This type is only an outgrowth 
of his use, in portraiture, of bronze or marble plaques instead 
of the traditional busts. He was original in his fundamental 
conceptions; the most notable important example is the great 
monument to Colonel Shaw, Boston, in which the commander 
of the first colored Massachusetts regiment of the Civil War 
is shown riding beside his marching troops, presided over by 
a floating feminine personification, who, pointing onward, 
carries the poppies of death and the laurel for victory after 
death. 

French. Daniel Chester French (b. 1850) is much more 
American than Saint-Gaudens. For his first period he had 
no other training than a month with Ward at Brooklyn, the 
excellent lectures on artistic anatomy by Rimmer at Boston, 
and later a year at Florence under Ball. The works of this 
period, such as the John Harvard in front of University Hall, 
Cambridge, are respectable examples of the “dry” manner of 
the progressive group in the transitional stage of American 
sculpture. He did not adopt the more modern style of the 
Parisian ateliers until his journey to Paris in the later 
eighties, from which date begins the series of his most char- 
acteristic creations. The achievement of no other sculptor 
is harder to evaluate. He has produced a series of works 
which indubitably deserve the adjective ‘‘great” and in which 
an enviable technical ability 1s equalled by large powers of 
poetic and spiritual expression. He is always, indeed; a pre- 
eminent and facile craftsman, and, as in the Memory of the 
Metropolitan Museum, a past master of the human form, 
especially the feminine nude. In the list of his best works, 
the following should be accorded a prominent place: the 
monument of John Boyle O’Reilly in the Back Bay Fens, 


FIG. 293—-FRENCH. MELVIN MONUMENT. SLEEPY HOLLOW CEMETERY, 
CONCORD, MASS. (PHOTO. BOGART) 


507 


508 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE - 


Boston; the Death and the Sculptor as a memorial to Martin 
Milmore in Forest Hills Cemetery near Boston; the Melvin 
monument in Sleepy Hollow Cemetery, Concord, Mass. 
(where he resorted to his favorite and impressive device of 
sinking the symbolic figure in the stele) (Fig. 293) ; the alle- 
gorical personifications of the bronze doors of the Boston 
Public Library; and the standing Lincoln at Lincoln City, 
Nebraska, which only suffers by comparison with the stand- 
ing effigy by Saint-Gaudens. There are, however, too large 
a number of other works which tend towards the common- 
place and are likely to detract from the high esteem accruing 
to him from the series of more creditable productions. Their 
faults are due to two interlinked causes, an excessive Ameri- 
canism and a tremendous fecundity, which, resulting from 
the popular appeal of his Americanism, has often caused him 
to drop to the level of what, were it not for the distinguished 
quality of the execution, would be little better than hack- 
work. The penalty of the American virtue of sobriety is the 
possibility of lapsing into dullness, and in his conceptions 
French has not infrequently fallen victim to this danger. Nor 
is he absolutely immune from our national sentimentality. He 
adds the youthful male figure to the American repertoire of 
ideal forms, but he is likely so to approximate this as well as 
the feminine figure to our racial type that they lose the 
nobility suited to imaginative and exalted themes. His many 
portraits for public commemoration, standing, seated, and 
equestrian, are not permeated by the force and vitality of 
Saint-Gaudens, and they, as well as his ideal figures, repro- 
duce too closely the indefiniteness and softness of American 
features, occasionally becoming even vacuous. It must be 
acknowledged that some of these defects are not altogether 
absent even from his best achievements. 

Adams. Having fallen, at Paris, under the prevalent spell 
of the Renaissance, Herbert Adams (b. 1858) reveals a 
predilection for the kind of subject done by his Florentine 
predecessors, for their sensitive, pictorial treatment of sur- 
faces, for their exquisite floral borders, and for polychromy. 
The most notable products of this imitation of the Renais- 
sance, which is relieved by the Americanism of the types, are 


MODERN SCULPTURE 509 


a series of feminine busts. Like his portrait statues, however, 
they lack the Florentine power of incisive characterization. 
His distinctive note is an agreeable sweetness that reminds 
one of the “sentimental” coterie of sculptors in the Quattro- 
cento. Among his most delightful achievements in this vein 
are his imitation of the Della Robbia in the tympanum 
for his doors of St. Bartholomew’s Church, New York, and 
the McMillan Fountain, Washington. In the fashion of 
Story, he sometimes seeks majesty in his series of portrait 
statues, as in the Bryant on the west side of the Library, New 
York, by enveloping them in robes, beneath which the form 
is not always strongly felt. 

Niehaus. Of German extraction but born in Cincinnati 
in 1855, Charles Henry Niehaus.obtained his foreign train- 
ing in the Royal Academy, Munich. There is something of 
German stolidity about all of his production, but especially 
about his ideal figures, and one misses occasionally a suf- 
ficient sense of humor. His imaginative conceptions fall 
rather flat. The nude Driller, on the monument at Titusville, 
Pennsylvania, to Edwin L. Drake, though it lacks the vibrant 
energy of Barnard’s Hewer, is a partial exception to these 
strictures. Possibly owing to a period of study at Rome, 
he has done a series of more frankly classic subjects, though 
with inevitable modernizations, than any other American 
sculptor of the epoch. To this class belongs the Orpheus as a 
memorial to the author of the “Star Spangled Banner” at 
Fort McHenry, Baltimore, in which, as in the Drake monu- 
ment, he has wisely had recourse to symbolism in place of 
the wearisome practice of commemoration through portrait 
statues. But he has also done his stint of portraits for monu- 
ments. If simplicity is really an American trait, then in these 
he is somewhat more American than the majority of his con- 
temporaries. They are good though not vivid likenesses. 
With the partial exception of his best work of this kind, the 
Garfield on Race Street, Cincinnati, the simplicity is seen 
particularly in the postures and gestures. He has also been 
much in requisition as a sculptor of historical panels, in which 
he is likely to approximate the kind of relief, with the fore- 
most figures almost detached, that Amadeo frequently es- 


510 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


sayed. The most familiar examples are his six panels for one 
of the three sets of the Astor Memorial Doors of Trinity 
Church, New York. 

Boston. The name of Bela Lyon Pratt (1867-1917) brings 
us to the modern sculptural output of Boston. The only rea- 
sons for placing him in the more American group are that he 
was called upon to commemorate so many American worthies 
and events and that, generally speaking, his art was soberer 
or, more properly, duller than the usual Gallic outbursts. His 
heads are usually vacuous. Among much slovenly modelling, 
the lank draperies often have the unfortunate appearance of 
loosely flung sheets. Otherwise, his long series of ideal sub- 
jects are quite French in manner. Among the most accept- 
able members of this series should be mentioned the Peace 
restraining War of the Butler Memorial at Lowell, Mass., 
and the medallions of the Four Seasons in the Congressional 
Library; among the least acceptable, the seated personifica- 
tions of Science and Art in front of the Boston Library. His 
portraits, for which he is fond of adopting Saint-Gaudens’s 
fashion of relief, are somewhat vitiated by a vacant stare and 
by the partial looseness and flabbiness which disfigure the 
majority of his productions. The rectors of Trinity parish, 
Boston, will have to take their places at the foot of this class 
—the statue of Phillips Brooks in front of the Boston Mu- 
seum and the relief of Dr. Donald in the church itself. Gross 
exaggeration, however, of Pratt’s shortcomings is now the 
vogue among artistic snobs and bluestockings. There is a cer- 
tain exaltation and even spirituality about almost al! of his 
figures, and his technique, however deficient, remains that of 
a master. In addition, he made important contributions to 
the repertoire of our national art. The Nathan Hale at 
Yale is one of several similar works in which he has attained 
much of the spirit of young American manhood. A number 
of bewitching studies of the adolescent feminine nude, well 
exemplified in the Boston and Worcester Museums, show that 
he was best when he was least pretentious. 

Chicago. Of Lorado Taft (b. 1860), who enjoys the dis- 
tinction of being in a very real sense the Vasari of American 
sculpture, it might be expected that his own art would be 


MODERN SCULPTURE 511 


decidedly imitative and eclectic; and it is true that now and 
again his work is reminiscent of those styles of his colleagues 
in Europe as well as in this country which he himself has 
so well defined. According to the fashion of the day fathered 
by Rodin, he likes to represent forms, as in his Solitude of 
the Soul in the Art Institute of Chicago, emerging from a 
mass of stone. His Soldiers’ Monument at Oregon, Ill., with 
its architectural exedra, is suggestive of Daniel Chester 


FIG. 294—TAFT. FOUNTAIN OF TIME. MIDWAY PLAISANCE, CHICAGO 


French. His group of the blind, based upon Maeterlinck’s 
play, very properly recalls the manner of Charlier and 
Bouchard. His symbolism, which is a sign of the times, may 
strike some critics as rather perfunctory. But perhaps he is 
no more subject to extraneous influences than other contem- 
porary masters. Certain it is that he has the great credit 
of overcoming the handicap of his historical and educational 
interests and of evolving an original mode of expression. His 
most palpable characteristic, quite in harmony with the at- 
mosphere of America and particularly Chicago, is a largeness 


512 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


of conception. Like Barnard, he imagines huge plastic enter- 
prises, most notably the new adornment of the Midway 
Plaisance with sculptured bridges and vast fountains, of 
which the Fountain of Time (Fig. 294) is already in place. 
It has fallen to his lot to be the creator especially of gran- 
diose fountains, such as the Fountain of the Great Lakes in 


FIG. 295—DALLIN. SIGNAL OF PEACH. LINCOLN PARK, CHICAGO. (PHOTO. 
W. H. PIERCE) 


front of the Art Institute, Chicago, and the Columbus Me- 
morial at Washington. Although his compositions are pro- 
nounced examples of the pictorialism that developed in sculp- 
ture in the nineteenth century, yet the arrangements have a 
sculptural compactness, and the separate figures, however 
Americanized in type, are likely to be conceived monu- 
mentally. 


MODERN SCULPTURE 513 


Indian subjects. One of the best exponents of the very 
general American proclivity for Indian themes is Cyrus E. 
Dallin of Boston (b. 1861). To his connoisseurship in Indian 
types he often unites an expression of the inner nature of 
the Red Man, although he keeps well away from melodrama 
and false pathos and conceives his subjects with sculptural 
restraint. His equestrian statues (Fig. 295) are the most 
celebrated of his long series of Indian subjects. His success 
in his chosen field does not mean that he lags behind his 
fellows when he tries more usual themes. He is particularly 
felicitous, like Fré- 
miet, in evocations 
from the past, ordi- 
narily from the co- 
lonial period; a re- 
cently completed in- 
stance is the Anne 
Hutchinson in front 
of the State House, 
Boston. Solon’ H. 
Borglum (1868-1922) 
found inspiration in 
the life of the. cow- 
boy as well as of the FIG. 206—SOLON BORGLUM. ON THE BORDER OF 


Indian. He caught vHe wire MAN’s LAND. METROPOLITAN 
and ennobled that ro- MUSEUM, NEW YORK. (PHOTO. BOGART) 


manticism of the 

western plains which affords material for so many of the 
scenarios of our moving pictures. His earlier groups, such 
as the Lassoing Wild Horses in the Cincinnati Museum, 
although sometimes too frantic in movement for the ordinary 
canons of art, are yet superb examples of craftsmanship and 
of expert sympathy with the subjects. Later in life he strove 
also for spiritual content, and he found it in the note of 
pathos (Fig. 296). Perhaps for the sake of enhancing pathos 
by a kind of mysticism, he tended to adopt, together with 
more compact composition, the broad impressionism of Rodin, 
towards which he had leaned from the first. 


514 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 
The Less. American. Group 


Barnard. George Grey Barnard (b. 1863), despite his long 
sojourns in France, is so independent that he is much less 
closely allied with the trends of modern Gallic sculpture than 
are the other members of this group. A relationship to Rodin 
might seem to be postulated by certain aspects of his work, 
such as the choice of primitive themes and types, the natural- 
istic modelling of the nude, and the concealment of parts of 
the bodies in the unhewn stone; but it may be that each 
sculptor developed these analogous traits separately, and in 
many other essential ways, especially in an avoidance of the 
corrugation of surfaces for the sake of pictorial impressionism, 
Barnard differs from his great French contemporary. In a 
recent work, however, the Lincoln in Lytle Park, Cincinnati,! 
he does, for the nonce, change his manner and adopt Rodin’s 
impressionism and extreme realism in portraits. The align- 
ment of a large number of nudes in a serious philosophic 
composition reminds one vaguely of Bartholomé, and very 
occasionally, like Bartholomé, he has departed from his usual 
earnestness of purpose to amuse himself, as in the Maiden- 
hood of the Metropolitan. Museum, with studies of the 
feminine nude for their own sake. His chief formative in- 
fluence, however, was Michael Angelo; and yet he is able to 
maintain his originality because of the modernism of his 
ideas and the modern and personal character with which he 
has invested forms partially derived from the Italian proto- 
types. Like the great Florentine, he has found in the nude 
his chosen mode of expression, and he has forced it, even 
contorted it, into a vehicle for abstract ideas. In a cele- 
brated composition in the Metropolitan Museum, he repre- 
sents, for instance, the conflict of the good and bad natures 
within a human being. The colossal Hewer at Cairo, Illinois, 
was intended as one of the constituents of a tremendous as- 
semblage meant to embody the History of Humanity but 
never realized. Of the groups at the entrance to the Capitol 
at Harrisburg, that on the right symbolizes the Burden of 
Life, that on the left the relief from the Burden in labor and 


* Replica in Manchester, England. 


MODERN SCULPTURE 515 


brotherly love (Fig. 297). He is again like Buonarroti in 
his fondness for the heroic and in his planning of vast plastic 
projects. He is truly a sculptor, in distinction from a painter 
working in clay, bronze, or stone, and he himself does as much 
as possible of the actual execution, so that his creations tend 
to have the warm, personal touch of Michael Angelo. 


FIG. 297—-BARNARD. GROUP AT LEFT OF ENTRANCE, CAPITOL, HARRISBURG. 
(PHOTO. MUSSER) 


MacMonmes. A greater contrast could not exist than be- 
tween Barnard and Frederick MacMonnies, who was born the 
same year. He is perhaps the most French among the more 
prominent sculptors of the earlier generation. So far as such 
catch-phrases have any value, he is an American Falguieére, 
though a lighter, gayer Falguiére, taking passion less seri- 
ously. His feminine nudes, the Bacchante, the Truth beside 
the entrance to the Library, New York, and especially the 


516 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Diana, are in the manner of Falguiére, but somewhat less 
voluptuous. Although he does not pass into the more defi- 
nite impressionism of Rodin, he carries the pictorial in tech- 
nique, postures, and accessories as far as or farther than any 
of Rodin’s predecessors. As in the work of Carpeaux, his 


FIG. 298—MACMONNIES. BATTLE MONUMENT. PRINCETON. (PHOTO. 
ROSE AND SON) 


modelling is crisp and nervous and retains the sensitiveness 
of the clay sketch. One must not look for any deep sig- 
nificance in his productions; what significance there is Caffin 
has well described as imaginativeness rather than imagina- 
tion. A technique that can cope with any problem has en- 
abled him to rival the modern Frenchmen among whom he 
was trained in the variety of subjects in which he has given 


MODERN SCULPTURE 517 


satisfaction. The Stranahan of Prospect Park Plaza, Brook- 
lyn, is a gauge of his talent as a commemorative portraitist. 
Evocations from the past, such as the Nathan Hale of City 
Hall Park, New York, by the very nature of the romantic 
themes, clamored for a pictorial treatment. The Horse 
Tamers at the Ocean Avenue entrance to Prospect Park 
demonstrate his ability in intricate movement. The enor- 
mous groups symbolizing the Army and Navy on the Me- 
morial Arch of Prospect Park Plaza and the Princeton Battle 
Monument (Fig. 298) constitute a curious species of sculpture 
of which he is peculiarly fond—masses of forms like huge 
earved pictures, exhibiting his skill in compactness of large 
and difficult compositions. His most recent works have been 
disappointing in their diminished sense of beauty of form 
and in an exaggeration of his characteristic unsculptural 
‘“‘fussiness” of detail. It is for these reasons, rather than for 
its theme, that one might perhaps wish that the protests 
against the Civic Virtue in City Hall Park, New York, had 
been efficacious. 

Bartlett. Paul Wayland Bartlett: (b. 1865) is as much an 
American Frémiet, as MacMonnies an American Falguieére. 
He inaugurated his career with animal subjects, ike the Bo- 
hemian Bear Trainer of the Metropolitan Museum, and he 
excels in such romantic evocations from the past as the 
Michael Angelo of the Rotunda of the Congressional Library 
and the equestrian Lafayette at Metz. 

Gutzon Borglum. Solon Borglum’s elder brother, Gutzon 
(b. 1867), is probably the most pronounced American expo- 
nent of sculptural impressionism. Exercising also the pro- 
fession of painter, he has manifested this style in a treatment 
of the surfaces of his sculpture with chiaroscuro and in a defi- 
nition only of essentials. This sketchiness sometimes creates a 
parallelism to Troubetzkoi, especially in his statuettes, as in 
the seated Ruskin of the Metropolitan Museum. He has 
given his allegiance to the most modern form of unsparing 
faithfulness to actuality, and he has Rodin’s and Troubetz- 
koi’s ability in accomplishing his purpose. The seated Lin- 
coln at Newark reveals that for his statues on monuments, 
as in all his productions, he is likely to choose the most casual 


518 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


pictorial postures. The symbolical group called “I Have 
Piped and Ye Have Not Danced” illustrates his adoption of 
the mannerism of submerging parts of the forms in the un- 
hewn stone. The pictorialism of his Mares of Diomedes in 
the Metropolitan Museum does not shrink from a frenzy of 
movement that beggars Rodin; but even here, as in many 
other works, he clings to Rodin’s closed contours. Apart from 
his mere studies of varied poses of the feminine form, which 
he tags with the characteristic modern sentimental titles, he 
utilizes impressionism to clothe conceptions that are often 
instinct with originality and power. 

Philadelphia. Philadelphia has been chiefly represented 
in sculpture by Charles Grafly (b. 1862), who, however, since 
1917 has taught also in Boston. His art has two phases. With 
a treatment as realistic as Falguiere’s and with an expert 
knowledge of anatomy, he has followed many modern Euro- 
peans in a devotion to the human body for its own sake; and 
he endows his nudes with the usual cast of vague modern 
symbolism. The second phase in which he has distinguished 
himself is lifelike portraiture. 


3. The Younger Generation 


One cannot delude himself into believing that our sculptors 
born in the seventies or eighties have as yet equalled the 
achievements of the generation who established American 
sculpture on a new plane after the Centennial. Little has been 
added to our national heritage through the cult of the nude 
form by Robert I. Aitken (b. 1878) and Sherry Edmundson 
Fry (b. 1879). Such a work as the Fountain of the Earth 
for the San Francisco exposition indicates that Aitken has 
apparently been influenced by Barnard, though he is more 
naturalistic. Both he and Fry, on the other hand, have re- 
cently indulged somewhat in primitive simplifications. A 
capital instance, in the case of Fry, is the Barrett Memorial 
Fountain at St. George, Staten Island. Fry has also done 
distinguished work in the ordinary kind of American memo- 
rial, as in the Abbey Monument at Tompkinsville, Conn. The 
achievement of Albin Polasek (b. 1879), like that of Grafly, 


MODERN SCULPTURE 519 


is twofold: he has produced studies of the nude of more than 
ordinary physical loveliness, and he has made busts of that 
modern vividness which one finds again in Grafly as well as 
in Hildebrand. Of a number of women who have chosen the 
sculptural vocation, two are preéminent for their originality. 
Anna Vaughn Hyatt (b. 1876) first attracted attention as an 
excellent modeller of animals; but recently she has not only 
widened her range of subject but at the same time she has 
set herself a standard by a continued realization of which 
she will become one of our greatest sculptors. The equestrian 
Jeanne d’Arc on Riverside Drive, New York, presents the 
happy union of equine knowledge, archeological accuracy, 
and compositional beauty with keen characterization and high 
power of spiritual expression. The same unusual combination 
of vigor, technical mastery, charm of arrangement, emotional 
content, and originality of conception is exhibited in a work 
from quite another sphere, the nude Diana. It might have 
been expected that the very general interest in kinetic poses 
created by Rodin would have early turned for themes to the 
plentiful source of the Russian dance; but it required the 
artistic intuition of Malvina Hoffman (b. 1887) to seize upon 
the opportunity. As a pupil of Rodin, it was almost inevitable 
that she should concern herself with the pictorial rather than 
the truly sculptural aspects of her themes and should crys- 
tallize the fleeting instant of the performer’s extreme activity ; 
but pace the esthetic purists, her talent for perception of the 
beautiful and her mastery over modern naturalistic anatomy 
and over other phases of the plastic art have enabled her to 
perpetuate some of the loveliest moments of the dance. Her 
representation of Pavlowa in the Gavotte has already become 
one of the best known of American statuettes; and her 
Bacchanale has been deemed worthy of a place in the Luxem- 
bourg Gardens. She has proved herself, indeed, equal to the 
several kinds of commissions that today fall to the lot of 
a sculptor, though with a tendency toward modern senti- 
mental symbolism that is as yet pleasantly absent from the 
production of Miss Hyatt. The Bacon memorial to the Har- 
vard men who died in the War is an impressive reversion to 
the type of mediewval tomb with recumbent knight; it is 


520 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


enough praise for the kneeling personification of grief at the 
head to observe that, in features and drapery, it recalls, per- 
haps unconsciously, the feminine figures of the “atelier de la 
Ste. Marthe.” 

Stylization. The greatest product of the return to the 
primitive in this country is Paul Manship (b. 1885). One 
could well be pardoned for resting content with his imitation 


FIG. 299—MANSHIP. DANCER AND GAZELLES 


of the achievements of former ages, for he brings to this task 
vitalizing freshness and a perfection of craftsmanship in re- 
producing the style desired that affords the same justifiable 
pleasure as the pyrotechnics of a Caruso. Especially remark- 
able are his ability in delicate low relief and the decorative 
sense manifested in the embellishment of his creations. The 
small bronze of the Centaur seizing upon a Dryad is a master- 
piece in the archaic Greek style. A dependence upon India 
is illustrated by the panels of the four personifications of the 


MODERN SCULPTURE 521 


elements for the Western Union Building, New York. The 
marble half-length of his infant daughter, Pauline, in the 
Metropolitan Museum is an astonishing performance in the 
mode of the realistic portraiture of the Quattrocento.. Nor 
does he quite stop at imitation. His conceptions, though 
merely pleasant fancies, emanate largely from his own mind 
(Fig. 299). One can discern also, beginning to emerge dimly 
from all this imitation, an esthetic and somewhat modern 
ideal for the human form that is quite personal, especially 
in the Briseis and other feminine figures. After all, never- 
theless, these are only intimations of individuality, and Man- 
ship cannot yet claim the title of a great artist, because 
hitherto he has not shown himself much more than an un- 
paralled imitator and a most accomplished technician. We 
must demand of him a further development and expression of 
his own personality, further technical originality, and a 
profounder spiritual content. We must ask of him what we 
find in Minne, Metzner, and MeStrovic, however disagreeable 
their message and however inferior to his their skill. 


XII. Post-IMPRESSIONISM 


So far as definition goes, Post-I[mpressionism is a very poor 
term for the latest movement in western art. It means no 
more than the movement that succeeded the development in 
European and American art known as impressionism. Critics 
have pointed out that a better title would have been Ex- 
pressionism. -The exponents of the tendency sacrifice repre- 
sentation not only to an expression of their own and others’ 
emotions, sensations, and personalities, but also to purely 
esthetic purposes. The Roumanian Constantin Brancusi 
may be taken as typical, in his earlier phases, of those who, 
without any carefully elaborated system, go no farther than 
a neglect of definition of certain details and an exaggeration 
of the characteristics that they wish to emphasize. In Bran- 
cusi’s bust of a Muse, for instance, the attention is con- 
centrated upon the accentuated effect of rapt dreaming in 
the face by reducing to the lowest terms the modelling of 
the parts that would not contribute to this result. The 


£22 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Cubists and Futurists have concocted intricate esthetic 
theories for the sake of creating.a purpose for their sacrifice 
of reality. In order to render evident the mathematical basis 
that the former conceive to underly reality, they simplify the 
sections of the body into geometrical shapes. An example is 
afforded by the group called Family Life (Fig. 300), the work 


FIG. 300—ARCHIPENKO. FAMILY LIFE 


of the Russian Alexander Archipenko. The Post-Impres- 
sionists tend to intrude upon one another’s specialties. Bran- 
cusi, in such productions as the Kiss, has lately turned towards 
Cubism; Archipenko, in the above-mentioned group, has 
adopted Brancusi’s intensification of reality, choosing for his 
sphere of emphasis the impression of sculptural bulk. He 
therefore feels it necessary to leave his heads and here and 


MODERN SCULPTURE 523 


there other sections of the anatomy as mere lumps of stone, to 
cut off all extremities, such as hands and toes, that: would 
project from the dense mass, and to exaggerate the robustness 
of physique. Thecompactness is doubtless meant also to serve 
a spiritual end, the emphasis upon the union of the family. 
Archipenko has likewise worked in the extreme sort of Cubism 
cultivated by the painters of the coterie. The cardinal 
principle of the Futurists is the accumulation, in the same 
work, without regard for the verities of space and time, of 
all significant connotations of the object, scene, or idea—its 
different temporal and kinetic phases, the other things and 
conceptions suggested by the theme, the emotional associa- 
tions that it arouses. For sculpture they add the mandate to 
employ all kinds of materials and actual articles as accessories 
in the same work. In Umberto Boccioni’s (d. 1916) colossal 
bust entitled “Head—Houses—Light,” many objects that fell 
within the vision of the sculptor are heaped upon the Buddha- 
like form: sections of distant houses, for instance, upon the 
head; bits of wooden railing, an iron grill, a baleony, and 
an actual toy representing a woman upon one shoulder; and 
the modelling of one side of the head is obscured (!) by a 
congeries of lines signifying rays of light. 

The sacrifice of veristic representation to the dictates of 
interpretative or esthetic ends is no new thing in art. Indeed, 
no art is anything but photographic that does not make such 
a sacrifice. The distinctive characteristic of Post-Impression- 
ism is that the sacrifice has proceeded so far that little or 
nothing of the body is still left upon the altar. The principal 
argument against this cult is the achievement of such men 
as Francesco Laurana, Maillol, Botticelli, and the Japanese. 
They have demonstrated that it is possible to conform to the 
representative and story-telling function, which is one of the 
legitimate phases of art, and at the same time, within the 
limits of this restriction, to attain as much of an emotional 
and esthetic effect as the Post-Impressionists with all their 
pretty theories. Whatever be the verdict upon the intrinsic 
merits of this new sculpture and painting, few would deny 
the salutary influence of the movement upon less revolution- 
ary phases of art in diverting them still farther from a mere 
literal reproduction of nature. 


524 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


Germany has provided us with two good, general books on the 
art of the nineteenth century: M. Schmid, Kunstgeschichte des 
19. Jahrhunderts, Leipzig, 1904, and F. Haack, Die Kunst des 
19. Jahrhunderts, fifth edition, Esslingen, 1918. J. Meier- 
Graefe’s Modern Art (English translation by F. Simmonds and 
G. W. Chrystal, New York, 1908) is a lengthy discussion of 
recent «esthetic tendencies with a characteristically German treat- 
ment from the philosophical standpoint, including brief passages 
on sculpture, especially on Rodin and his school. The plastic art 
of the twentieth century has been described by L. Taft, with his 
usual geniality of style, in Modern Tendencies in Sculpture, 
Chicago, 1921, and, with some inaccuracy and indecisiveness, by 
K. Parkes in Sculpture of Today, 2 vols., London, 1921. 
W. Radenberg in Moderne Plastik, Leipzig, 1912, furnishes a 
good collection of illustrations, chiefly of German sculpture. 

The following is a list of monographs on modern French sculp- 
tors: * on Rude (all at Paris), A. Bertrand, 1888, L. de Fourcaud, 
1904, and J. Calmette, 1920; on David d’Angers, H. Jouin, Paris, 
1878; on Barye, A. Alexandre, Paris, and C. de Kay (H. Eckford), 
New York, both of 1889; on Carpeaux, L. Riotor, Paris, 1905, 
P. Vitry, Paris, 1912, Florian-Parmentier, Paris, and A. Mabille 
de Poncheville, Brussels, 1921; on Frémiet, J. de Biez, Paris, 
1910; on Dalou, M. Dreyfous, Paris, 1903; on Falguiére, L. Béné- 
dite, Paris, 1902; on Chapu, O. Fidiére, Paris, 1894; on Rodin, 
O. Grautoff, Leipzig, 1908, J. Cladel, Brussels, 1908, M. Ciol- 
kowska, Chicago, 1912, and G. Coquiot, Paris, 1915; on Maillol, 
O. Mirbeau, Liége, 1921; on Bartholomé, P. Clemen in Die 
Kunst, VII (1908), pp. 33-53; on Bourdelle, A. Castell in Die 
Kunst, X XIX (1914), pp. 218-227; and on Bouchard, H. Marcel 
in the Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1913, I, pp. 236-252. 

Any list on German sculpture should include: on Rauch, in 
addition to the book mentioned in connection with Schadow, 
F. and K. Eggers, Berlin, 1873-1891; on Begas, A. G. Meyer, 
Leipzig, 1897; on Siemering, B. Daun, Leipzig, 1906; on Maison, 
F. von Ostini in Die Kunst, III (1900-1901), pp. 181-142; on 
Hildebrand, A. Heilmeyer, Leipzig, 1902, and A. L. Mayer in 
Die Kunst, XXXVII (1917-1918), pp. 61-66; on Hahn, G. J. 


* With such an abundance of bibliographical material on modern 
sculpture, only the most significant books and articles can be here 
included; for a fuller list, cf. the bibliography at the end of A 
History of European and American Sculpture, by C. R. Post. 


MODERN SCULPTURE 525 


Wolf in Die Kunst, XXIX (1913-1914), pp 289-298; on Hoetger, 
G. Biermann, Munich, 1913; on Lehmbruck, P. Westheim, Pots- 
dam, 1922; and on Klinger, M. Schmid, Leipzig, 1899, G. Treu, 
Leipzig, 1900, F. Servaes, Berlin, 1904, P. Kiihn, Leipzig, 1907, 
and W. Pastor, Berlin, 1918. The general evolution of Austrian 
sculpture is treated by L. Hevesi in Oesterreichische Kunst im 
neunzehnten Jahrhundert, Leipzig, 1903, and by H. Haberfeld in 
The Art Revival in Austria, special summer number of the 
Studio for 1906. <A collection of photographs of Tilgner’s works 
was published by L. Hevesi in 1897 (Vienna); Metzner is the 
subject of a monograph by O. Stoessl, Prague, 1905. 

The best general works on modern Belgian sculpture are: 
O. G. Destrée, The Renaissance of Sculpture in Belgium, The 
Portfolio, XXIII (1895); E. Hessling, La sculpture belge con- 
temporaine, Berlin, 1903 (with magnificent illustrations) ; 
H. Hymans, Belgische Kunst des 19. Jahrhunderts, Leipzig, 
1906; and P. Schumann, Belgische Bildhauer der Gegenwart in 
Die Kunst, XV (1906-1907), pp. 57-70 and 81-97. The student 
should consult also the following monographs: on Meunier, 
K. Scheffler, Berlin, 1903, and W. Gensel, Leipzig, 1905; on 
Braecke, V. Pica in Emporium, XIX (1904), pp. 3-19; on 
Charlier, S. Pierron, Brussels, 1913; on Lambeaux, H. Teirlinck, 
Antwerp, 1909; on Lagaé, V. Pica in Emporium, XXXV (1912), 
pp. 163-176; on Vineotte, P. Lambotte and A. Goffin, Brussels, 
1918; on Rousseau, M. des Ombiaux, Brussels, 1908; and on 
Minne, A. Fortlage in Die Kunst, X XVII (1913), pp. 347-353. 

Discussions of the sculpture are included in the two standard 
works, A. R. Willard, History of Modern Italian Art, London, 
1902, and L. Callari, Storia dell’arte contemporanea italiana, 
Rome, 1909. The chief monographs are: H. S. Frieze, Giovanni 
Dupre, London, 1888; R. Manzoni, Vincenzo Vela, Milan, 1906; 
S. di Giacomo, Vincenzo Gemito, Naples, 1905; and G. Cena, 
Leonardo Bistolfi in Nuova Antologia, IV series, 117 (1905), 
pp. 1-20. Allusion should be made also to the little manuals on 
modern Italian art, with copious illustrations, compiled by 
F. Sapori and published at Turin. 

M. H. Spielmann’s British Sculpture and Sculptors of Today, 
London, 1901, is less incisive in distinguishing the styles of the 
different masters than it is rich in material. In addition to the 
book of W. C. Monkhouse on Foley, London, 1875, the following 
articles are among those that will assist in obtaining a more 
detailed knowledge of modern British attainments in sculpture: 
the three articles by W. Armstrong in the Portfolio on Stevens, 


526 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


1890, pp. 127-183, Thornycroft, 1888, pp. 111-115, and Ford, 1890, 
pp. 67-71; W. K. West, The Work of F. Derwent Wood, Interna- 
tional Studio, XXIV (1904-1905), pp. 297-806; M. S. Watts, 
George Frederic Watts, London, 1912; A. L. Baldry, A Notable 
Sculptor, Alfred Drury, Studio, XXXVII (1906), pp. 2-18; J. 
Hatton, Alfred Gilbert, London Art Journal, Easter Art Annual, 
1903; H. C. Marillier, Die Kunst George Framptons, Die Kunst, 
X (1904), pp. 369-377, and W. K. West, Some Recent Monu- 
mental Sculpture by Sir George Frampton, Studio, LIV (1911- 
1912), pp. 35-43. 

In addition to the general works listed at the end of Chapter I, 
those who wish to pursue modern Spanish sculpture further may 
read O. Rudy, Modern Spanish Sculpture, The Work of Agustin 
Querol in the International Studio, XXVIII (1906), pp. 300-306, 
and J. Francés’s monograph on Clara, Madrid, 1923. The general 
works on Scandinavian art include: E. Hannover, Ddnische 
Kunst des 19. Jahrhunderts, Leipzig, 1907; G. Nordensvan, 
Schwedische Kunst des 19. Jahrhunderts, Leipzig, 1904; chapters 
in H. G. Leach’s Scandinavia of the Scandinavians, New York, 
1916; and rather inadequate chapters in Scandinavian Art, New 
York, 1922, a book due to the collaboration of C. Laurin, E. 
Hannover, and J. Thiis. The monographs and articles on Seandi- 
navian sculptors include: M. Bigeon, a chapter on Sinding in 
Les révoltés scandinaves, Paris, 1894; G. Grappe, Stephan 
Sinding, Paris, 1911; V. Pica, Carl Millés, Emporium, X XIX 
(1909), pp. 3-19; J. Thiis, Gustav Vigeland, Ord och Bild, XIII 
(1904), pp. 99-116; H. Dedekam, Vigelands Fontene, in the same 
periodical, X XVII (1918), pp. 401-421; and The Vigeland Foun- 
tain, The American Scandinavian Review, VIII (1920), pp. 
98-32. For the two great Slavic sculptors, the student is referred 
to C. Brinton’s introduction to a Catalogue of Sculpture by 
Prince Paul Troubetzkoy (exhibited by the American Numis- 
matic Society), 1911, and to the monograph on Me&trovic com- 
piled by M. Curéin, London, 1919. 

L. Taft’s already listed book on American sculpture can best 
be supplemented by C. H. Caffin’s essays in American Masters 
of Sculpture, New York, 1913, by the large, illustrated Catalogue 
of the highly representative Exhibition of American Sculpture 
at the Hispanic Society, New York, in 1923, valuable for biog- 
raphies and lists of works, especially of our younger masters, 
and by A. Adams’s chatty little book, The Spirit of American 
Sculpture, written for the same occasion. From the large amount 
of material on individual American sculptors, the following titles 


MODERN SCULPTURE 527 


may be selected: W. O. Partridge, Thomas Ball, New England 
Magazine, N. S., XII (1895), pp. 291-304; A. Adams, John 
Quincy Adams Ward, New York, 1912; the two apologies for 
Rimmer, T. H. Bartlett, The Art Life of William Rimmer, 
Boston, 1882, and G. Borglum, Our Prophet Unhonored in Art, 
New York Evening Post, June 18, 1921; M. E. Phillips, Remi- 
niscences of William Wetmore Story, Chicago and New York, 
1897; W. C. Brownell, The Sculpture of Olin Warner, Scribner’s, 
XX (1896), pp. 429-441; on Saint-Gaudens, the books by R. Cor- 
tissoz, Boston, 1907, and C. L. Hind, New York, 1908; S. Brinton, 
An American Sculptor, Daniel Chester French, International 
Studio, XLVI (1912), pp. 211-214, and The Recent Sculpture of 
Daniel Chester French in the same periodical, LIX (1916), pp. 
17-24; R. Armstrong Niehaus, The Sculpture of Charles Henry 
Niehaus, New York, 1901; on Pratt, articles by W. H. Downes 
in the International Studio, XX XVIII (1909), pp. ili-x, and by 
L. M. Bryant in the same periodical, LVII (1915-1916), pp. 
eXx1-cxxv; on Taft, articles by R. H. Moulton in the Archi- 
tectural Record, XXXVI (1914), pp. 12-24, and in Art and 
Archeology, XII (1921), pp. 242-252; on Dallin, A. Seaton 
Schmidt in the International Studio, LVIII (1916), pp. 109-114; 
on Solon Borglum, C. H. Caffin’s introduction to the Catalogue 
of the exhibition of his works at New York; on Barnard, P. 
Clemen in Die Kunst, XXIII (1910-1911), pp. 385-405; on 
MacMonnies, F. Strother in the World’s Work, XI (1905-1906), 
pp. 6965-6981, and C. H. Meltzer in the Cosmopolitan, LIII 
(1912), pp. 207-211; on Gutzon Borglum, L. Mechlin in the 
International Studio, XXVIII (1906), pp. xxxy-xliii, and 
the book of photogravures of his works published at Stamford; 
Connecticut, in 1913; on Grafly, V. C. Dallin in the New Eng- 
land Magazine, N. S., XXV (1901-1902), pp. 228-235; on Aitken, 
A. Hoeber in the International Studio, LIV (1914-1915), pp. 
Xy-xvili; and on Manship, M. Birnbaum’s introduction to the 
Catalogue of the exhibition of his works at New York, 1916, 
and the monograph by A. E. Gallatin, New York, 1917. 

The available books on Post-Impressionism vary in their use- 
fulness, O. L. Hind’s The Post-Impressionists, London, 1911, is 
rather vague and inarticulate in its sympathy for the movement. 
A. J. Eddy’s Cubists and Post-Impressionism, second edition, 
Chicago, 1919, is more lucid. P. Fechter in Der Hxpression- 
ismus, third edition, Munich, 1919, treats his theme with German 
thoroughness. 


CHAPTER XV 
THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 
I. Introductory 


In comparison to occidental sculpture, the most palpable 
characteristic of oriental sculpture is its conservatism. There 
are minor esthetic variations between the successive periods 
in the art of each country, but generally speaking, except for 
degrees of superiority or inferiority, the style remains much 
the same from the beginning to the end of each national tra- 
dition. One of the causes of conservatism was the dependence 
of art upon a hieraticism that continued to prescribe for 
sacred figures unchanging canons as rigid as those of neo- 
classicism in Europe. The forms and draperies were treated 
with a conventionalization that recalls the Romanesque. The 
images of the more austere gods and saints started with 
frontality, and, because of conservatism, never got very far 
away from it. The stationary nature of oriental sculpture, 
however, had its compensations. The endless repetitions of 
the same themes in the same manner facilitated the frequent 
achievement of a perfection that may well be envied by 
occidental rivals. The possibility of depending upon prece- 
dent for the principal constituents of a statue codperated 
with the general oriental proclivity for design on a small 
rather than a large scale to allow the artist to concentrate 
much of his attention upon decorative detail and thus to 
attain an exquisite supremacy in its rendering. The custom 
of polychromy was universal. 

The two great hearths of oriental sculpture are India and 
China. From the former were derived the schools of Ceylon, 
Java, Burma, Siam, and Cambodia; from the latter, the 
schools of Corea and Japan. Indeed, one who has a mania 

528 


THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 529 


for tracing origins would be perfectly right in asserting that, 
with the exception of the unimportant production of the early 
Han dynasty, the sculpture of China, however free from 
slavish imitation and however superior to its models, was 
partially based upon Indian precedent. 


II. Inopta 


Introductory. Indian sculpture and its tributaries are 
even more petrified by tradition than the output of the 
Chinese esthetic group. Personality and individual initia- 
tive are so lacking that almost no craftsman has stood out 
sharply enough from his fellows to leave us his name, and 
it has seriously been questioned whether any of the vast pro- 
duction of India should be dignified by the term Fine Art 
in distinction from Industrial Art. Few critics would now 
be so chary of the former epithet as to confine it to works 
embodying an intense expression of personality. Almost all 
critics would admit within the charmed circle of Fine Art at 
least the best Indian carvings; the number would vary greatly 
according to one’s esthetic and racial prejudices. Writers 
on Indian sculpture always feel it necessary to apologize for 
or at least to explain two of its characteristics that might dis- 
courage the beginner. First, the omission of the modelling to 
which the westerner is accustomed and the consequent 
smoothness and roundness of the forms may be ascribed not 
only to the less apparent muscularity of the Hindu body but 
also to a religious proscription of realism. The same charac- 
teristic occurs in a less degree in Mongolian sculpture. The 
narrow waist the Indians shared with Cretan, Egyptian, and 
archaic Greek art. The concomitant phenomenon of im- 
passivity in the countenance may be traced to a similar pious 
reason. Furthermore, Indian taste has always set less value 
upon correctness of form and of perspective than upon move- 
ment, rhythm, and expression through posture. Second, 
whether one accepts the monstrous forms that occur in 
Brahmanical in distinction from Buddhist art will depend 
upon whether he is enough of an oriental enthusiast to dis- 
cern in them a sufficient religious significance to bestow upon 


530 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


them a spiritual value that obliterates the impression of 
grotesqueness and even enhances the esthetic appeal. Cer- 
tainly the enjoyment of the uninitiated will be impaired by 
the multiplication of arms and faces and by the capping of 
human bodies with bestial heads. Indian art is distinguished 
from Chinese and Japanese by a greater sensuality in the 
treatment of the feminine form and by a greater profusion 
of ornamental accessories. It turns more readily to relief 
than to figures in the round and reveals little architectural 
sense in adapting the lines of its carvings to their function in 
the decoration of buildings. 

The history of sculpture in India may be divided into five 
periods. Of the three religions of India, Buddhism inspired 
the sculpture of the three medial periods, the Asokan, the 
Greco-Buddhist, and the Gupta, although during the last 
epoch Brahmanism had already encroached somewhat upon 
its domain. In the fifth or medieval period, which began 
roughly in the seventh century after Christ, the revived and 
more essentially Hindu religion of Brahmanism was, with a 
few provincial exceptions, the directing force. Within this 
fifth period falls also the comparatively unimportant part 
played by Jainism. The invasion and occupation by the 
Mohammedans, since their doctrines were hostile to sculpture, 
need not concern us. : 

The “archaic” period. It is only the most recent criticism 
that has proposed to assign to as remote a date as the sixth 
and fifth centuries B.C. a few monumentally ponderous and 
impressive statues, chiefly, it is hkely, portraits of monarchs, 
in the Mathura and Calcutta Museums, and thus to create 
for Indian sculpture an earlier period of extant production 
than had hitherto been established. If we accept this chro- 
nology, which now may be said to be favored by the best 
opinion, we have discovered an epoch of Indian sculpture 
with a splendid esthetic tradition independent of any foreign 
influence and of such advanced technical ability that it is 
necessary to presuppose a long history of previous, non-extant 
carving. 

The Agokan period. Although “Asokan” applies properly 
only to the reign of the emperor and propagandist of 


THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 531 


Buddhism, Asoka (273-232 B.C.), under whom all but the 
extreme south of India was united, the term, for the sake of 
convenience, may be extended to include the production, in 
a similar style, of the two succeeding centuries before Christ. 
A certain degree of influence from Mesopotamia, Assyria, 
and Persia upon Asokan art is now generally assumed. It 
has even been proposed to discern already a slight Hellenistic 
strain in the later output of this period, subsequent to Asoka 
but long before the days of Graco-Buddhist art; but to 
many critics such fac- 
tors as the habit of nar- 
rative bas-relief, bits of 
technical adroitness, and 
remote analogies in the 
composition of certain 
sacred motifs will not 
constitute adequate evi- 
dence. The fact that 
the reliefs are pictorial 
rather than sculptural in 
their conception makes 
it just as likely that they 
were based upon painted 
Indian prototypes. In 
any case,the foreign bor- 
rowings from one source 


or another have been so a 

; ay 3 FIG. —BUDDHIST SPRITE. GATEWAY. 
thoroughly acclimatized SANCHI. (PHOTO. JOHNSTON AND HOFF- 
and combined with pre- man) 


ponderant indigenous 

elements as to imply that the sculptures are a continuation 
of the native tradition now apparently established for 
the archaic period or that the hands of the sculptors had 
been previously trained to work in wood, clay, ivory, 
or metals in objects that have perished. Despite a few 
conventions, especially in the drapery and in the foreshorten- 
ing of- limbs, and despite occasional primitive crudities of 
modelling, the period was marked by a fresh naturalism that 
was very rare in later epochs of Indian sculpture. Upon this 


532 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


naturalism was often pleasantly superimposed the usual 
oriental nicety of execution. The mere delight in rapid story- 
telling, however, sometimes caused the sculptor to treat de- 
tails rather hastily. Practically the only extant plastic relics 
of Agoka’s reign are a number of monolithic columns crowned 
by symbolic animals. The best specimen is at Sarnath near 
Benares. Of Post-Asokan work, which, in general, is less 
vigorous and crisp than that of the third century, the most 
familiar examples are the sculptured stones from the ruins of 
Bharhut, in the Museum of Calcutta, representing various 
Buddhist sprites, scenes from the life of Buddha, and a multi- 
tude of animals, and the similar but more delicately executed 
subjects on the gateways at Sanchi (Fig. 301). 

The Greco-Buddhist period. The Greco-Buddhist move- 
ment, was at its height from the first through the third cen- 
tury after Christ. The intermediaries between the Greeks 
and the Asiatics of India and China in its dissemination were 
the Scythians of central Asia, who were converted to Bud- 
dhism. The movement centered in the extreme northwestern 
section of India and flourished under the dynasty of the Indo- 
Seythian tribe of the Kushans who had occupied that region 
around their capital Peshawar. Since this region was formerly 
known as Gandhara, the term, school of Gandhara, is in very 
general usage. The position of Gandhara on the northwest- 
ern frontier made possible a contact with Hellenistic art, 
especially the art of that outpost of Greek civilization north- 
west of India, Bactria, and the probable importation of 
Hellenistic artists. The result was a harmonious fusion of 
some of the characteristics of Greek art with the already 
established Indian types and style. The heads took on an 
Hellenic cast, the bodies became sturdier and were the recipi- 
ents of more realistic, muscular modelling, and the draper- 
ies fell in folds approved by Greek precedent. The period 
witnessed what were probably the first representations of 
Buddha himself (though non-extant images may very well 
have been carved before). The most common mode of 
representing him was the one that henceforth became tradi- 
tional in oriental art: he is conceived as seated with crossed 
feet and hands in the posture that the Indian ascetic or yogi 


THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 533 


finds easy when he wishes to withdraw into himself for medi- 
tation. In Gandhara art he sometimes wears moustaches. 
Among the most important examples of sculpture produced 
in great quantity in the Gandhara district proper are: a large 
number of well characterized heads of sacred effigies, in clay, 
stucco, or terracotta, about forty of which may be seen in 
the British Museum; a seated, moustached Buddha in the 
Ethnographical Mu- 
seum, Berlin (Fig. 302) ; 
a seated, smooth-faced 
Buddha with unadorned 
halo in the British Mu- 
seum; the relief of In- 
dra’s visit to Buddha in 
the Calcutta Museum; 
and the Kuvera or god 
of riches in the Lahore 
Museum (formerly be- 
lieved to be the portrait 
of an  Indo-Scythian 
king), remotely  sug- 
gested by the type of the 
Phidian Zeus. To what 
an extent the rest of In- 
dian territory fell under 
the Hellenic spell is a 


moot point. In any case, 
outside of Gandhara the FIG. 302—BUDDHA OF THE GANDHARA STYLE. 

a . MUSEUM, BERLIN. (FROM “A HISTORY OF 
national traits greatly FINE ART IN INDIA AND CEYLON” BY VIN- 
preponderate over the cent a. smiTH) 


foreign borrowings. The 

chief sites are Sarnath and Mathura south of Delhi; the 
sculpture from the latter site has been gathered in the 
Museum at the place and in the Museum at Calcutta. 
The lively, highly imaginative, and beautifully decorative 
carvings from the stipa (Buddhist chapel) at Amaravati, the 
majority of which are distributed between the Central Mu- 
seum, Madras, and the British Museum, are so thoroughly 
nationalized in manner that it is a question whether there 


534 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


is any Greek influence, and, if so, whether it sifted in from 
Gandhara or drifted in from maritime routes. 

The Gupta period. The next period is styled Gupta from 
the dynasty (320-480 A.D.) which finally managed to gain 
control over a zone stretching across all northern India from 
central Bengal on the east to Kathiawar on the west, but 
the term is usually extended to include the art of India to 
the middle of the seventh century. From one standpoint the 
epoch may be viewed as transitional between the partly 
Hellenized art of Gandhara and the thoroughly nationalized 
art of the Indian Middle Ages. . Although a certain number 
of Brahmanical themes began to be executed in lasting ma- 
terials, Buddhism still dominated the field of sculpture. The 
definitive qualities of the Gupta style are a frequent luscious 
amplitude of form, a soft elegance, the use of tight-fitting, 
diaphanous garments, and a general emotional restraint. 
Among the finest specimens of Buddhist inspiration are the 
carvings at Ajanta in western India, the seated Buddha with 
elaborate halo and two flying siddhas in the Sarnath Museum, 
and the standing Buddha also with a highly ornamented halo 
in the Mathura Museum. | 

The medieval and modern period. It is usual to sub- 
divide the Middle Ages into an earlier period from the middle 
of the seventh to the middle of the eighth century A.D., 
sometimes called classic because the most essentially Indian 
characteristics then found their highest expression, and a 
later period which betrays a very gradual artistic decline, 
which passes into modern art at no very definite date, but 
which, for the sake of convenience, may be considered to have 
ended with the beginning of the British rule in 1761. The 
triumph of Brahmanism, except in a few districts, crushed 
out the genial representation of episodes from every-day life 
that had distinguished Buddhist art, and covered India with 
« luxuriance of ascetic or weirdly fantastic themes. Western 
India now for the first time assumed an important position 
in the history of sculpture: the carvings in its cave temples, 
as at Elura near Aurangabad and on the island of Elephanta 
off Bombay, are among the greatest examples of monumental 
sculpture in stone during the classic age. The south now also 


THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 535 


loomed larger in the general prospect of Indian art, more for 
its bronzes than for its stone sculpture, and in stone sculpture 
more for abundance and chimerical profusion than for in- 
trinsic merits of modelling and naturalism. Of the earlier 
period, however, the work at Mamallaptram, just below 
Madras, vies with the achievements of Eltra and Elephanta. 


FIG. 303—SIVA ENGAGED IN THE COSMIC DANCE. MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS, 
BOSTON 


The sculptural manner patronized by the powerful emperors 
who, with their capital at Vijayanagar, dictated to the whole 
south from the fourteenth to the sixteenth centuries is best 
represented in the temples at that place and on the gateways 
at Tarpatri near Anantapur in Madras. It leads slowly into 
the grotesque and often gauche art that. has been lavishly 
employed to deck the temples of Dravida (extreme southern 
India) from the sixteenth century to the present. day. 


536 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


Bronzes. It is for its small figures in bronze or copper 
that southern India has particularly attracted the attention 
of connoisseurs. They are distinguished by a lively sense 
of general design, by ability to embody impressively the de- 
sired idea, and by technical delicacy, especially in the hands, 
to the modelling of which, in lieu of naturalistic accuracy 
in other parts of the body, the Indian artist has always de- 
voted himself and in the characterization by which he has 
always excelled. Masterpieces of this style are statuettes, 
now scattered through several museums, of Siva engaged in 
the cosmic dance (Fig. 303). 

Orissa. In Orissa, where the art was chiefly Brahmanical, 
the Mohammedan conquest did not succeed in crushing 
plastic production until the end of the thirteenth century. 
The greatest assemblage of sculpture in this region was not 
done until this very century, at Konarak. The decorative 
reliefs are disfigured by an extreme phase of the obscenity 
so often encountered in Indian art; the most interesting pieces 
of sculpture are the seven colossal horses which are conceived 
to be drawing the temple, in the guise of the Sun’s chariot, 
and in which anatomical accuracy is sacrificed to a superb 
monumentality. 


TL? Erion 


The most important and beautiful school of Indian sculp- 
ture, outside of India itself, was the Sinhalese. The art of 
Ceylon, with its religion, remained Buddhist. It may be 
divided into two periods: the first, while the capital was still 
at Anuradhapura, corresponding roughly to the Gupta epoch 
in India; the second, when from the eighth to the thirteenth 
century, the capital was at Pollonaruwa, corresponding to the 
Middle Ages in India. Typical Gupta works at or from 
Anuradhapura are: the seated Buddha coming from the 
vicinity of the Jetavanarama dagaba or chapel and now in 
the Colombo Museum, exhibiting the tendency to the colossal 
so often met with in Ceylon and perhaps surpassing any 
example on the mainland in contemplative majesty; and the 
standing Buddha, with the characteristic crimped and trans- 


THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 537 


parent drapery of the period, at the Ruanveli dagaba. 
Specialties of Sinhalese sculpture are: the flat, semi-circular 
“moonstones” set at the foot of staircases and adorned in 
low relief with curving bands of delightfully rendered ani- 
mals; and figures at entrances, especially misshapen dwarfs, 
to avert evil spirits. The stone sculpture of the medieval 
period is well represented by the colossal sage or King 
Parakrama Bahu at Pollonaruwa, belonging to a type of 
fairly realistic portraiture much affected throughout the his- 
tory of Sinhalese art. Far more interesting are the medieval 
bronzes. It is still a moot point whether they were produced 
in Ceylon itself or simply imported from southern India; 
in any case, they rival, if they do not surpass, the continental 
specimens. The Boston Museum possesses one of the loveliest 
specimens in the seated Avalokitegvara. 


Veer AVS 


Javanese art did not begin before the fifth century after 
Christ, it reached its height in the ninth century, and came to 
an end with the Mohammedan conquest of the fifteenth. Both 
Buddhism and Brahmanism are given expression, but the 
products of the latter religion are inferior. Critics are still 
investigating the problem of the region of India from which 
the Javanese sculptors first drew their inspiration, inclining 
perhaps, in harmony with certain Indian traditions, to favor 
the West. The forms have the fullness of the Gupta period, 
with less slender limbs and less narrow waists than the usual 
Indian or Sinhalese figure. The most celebrated monument 
is the series of 1600 reliefs relating Buddhist hagiology on 
the pyramidal temple of Borobudur. They are distinguished 
by a naturalistic knowledge, an imaginative variety, an ap- 
preciation of the human side of life, a technical skill, and a 
sensitiveness to facial beauty that cannot be paralleled in 
the narrative sculpture of India itself. An explanation has 
been sought even in a hypothetical Chinese influence. The 
American student may obtain a good idea of Javanese sculp- 
ture from the relief of Durga slaying the demon Mahisa, in 
the Boston Museum. 


538 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 
V. CAMBODIA 


The Indian art that flourished in Cambodia from the ninth 
to the twelfth century was likewise chiefly Buddhist and 
naturally embodied in its sacred effigies a more Mongolian 
ethnic type. Its ornamental carvings, the best known speci- 
mens of which may be seen on the temples at Angkor, are 
marked by somewhat greater realism in detail, by a more 
playful spirit, and by a truer decorative sense than those of 
India proper. The head of Buddha in the Fogg Museum at 
Harvard proves that in contemplative figures a more evident 
dreaminess was obtained by still further closing the eyes. 


VI: CHINA 


Introductory. Chinese sculpture, together with its depen- 
dent schools of Corea and Japan, was more conscious than 
Indian sculpture of its profession as a Fine Art; it therefore 
has a nobler spiritual content and developed a finer 
technique, especially a greater crispness and accuracy of 
modelling. In contrast to the rather lackadaisical style of 
India, 1t was more virile and dignified both in inspiration and 
in execution. Its superiority may be partially due to the fact 
that it was the more humanly sympathetic type of Buddhism 
from northern India which was imported into the Mongolian 
countries. Unfortunately the scarcity of the extant or at 
least discovered and excavated monuments makes the study 
of Chinese sculpture proper very difficult. In China itself 
only monuments in stone remain, and even these are in remote 
places. For our knowledge of works in bronze and other 
materials we have to rely upon specimens in Japan, more or 
less hypothetically ascribed to Chinese provenience, or upon 
Corean and Japanese adaptations of the Chinese types. 

The archaic period. The numerous carved slabs, found in 
the caves of the Han dynasty (206 B.C.—220 A.D.) in the 
province of Shantung need not concern us, for, produced at 
first by incision or later by the lowest kind of relief, they 
are scarcely sculptural at all, but rather translations of 
painting into stone. Some good specimens may be seen in 


THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 539 


the Boston Museum. Chinese sculpture did not really begin 
until the essentially plastic religion, Buddhism, had thor- 
oughly established itself in the fourth century. The archaic 
period may be considered to have extended from the fourth 
century to the accession of the Tang dynasty in 618. Dur- 
ing this period until 589, the country was separated 


FIG. 304—WEI STELE. FENWAY COURT, BOSTON. (COURTESY OF MRS. JOHN 
L. GARDNER) 


into two parts, a northern kingdom with its capital at Tatung 
under the Wei dynasty, and a southern kingdom with its 
capital at Nanking under a succession of short-lived dy- 
nasties; in 589 the cleavage was healed under the royal house 
of Sui. Among the most important extant specimens in the 
north are the carvings in the living rock near Tatung and at 
Longmen near Honan. The demand for the same Buddhist 
themes as in India naturally entailed a partial adoption of 


540 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


the Indian sculptural style, especially, at Tatung, of the 
Indian slimness of physique, and there seems to be also in- 
disputable evidence of at least a slight interest in the Greco- 
Buddhist movement. The channel by which Hellenic in- 
fluence reached China was the region of Turkestan, where 
the Indo-Scythian conquerors had practised since the third 
century after Christ a style allied to that of Gandhara but 
somewhat more Greek. The most significant remains in 
Turkestan have been found in the vicinity of Khotan. The 
most beautiful examples of Wei sculpture are a number of 
stele and similar slabs (Fig. 304), carved with Buddhistic 
figures in the round and in relief that is often very low, and 
embodying at its noblest the uniquely Chinese fusion of 
monumental austerity with technical exquisiteness and 
luxuriance of detail. Of the more indigenous sculpture of 
the southern Chinese kingdom, the most interesting examples 
were produced in the eastern section of southern China called 
Go (which thus sometimes gives its name to the style), and 
were executed in bronze. The heavy, architectural forms of 
this style, with their rectangular contours and almost fearful 
severity of expression, may be studied at present in the ten- 
tatively attributed specimens exported to Japan and in their 
Japanese and Corean imitations. 

The Tang period. The Golden Age of Chinese art, the 
Tang period, is usually taken to cover the years from 618 to 
the accession of the Sung dynasty in 960. The first part of 
the period, the seventh century, witnessed the greatest 
flourishing of the Greco-Buddhist style, owing to Chinese 
military conquests, diplomatic negotiations, and pilgrimages 
in Turkestan. It should be acknowledged at once, however, 
that one school of critics seeks to reduce the Hellenic influence 
to even lower terms than in the greater part of India, and 
thus is forced to emphasize the importance of the indigenous 
evolution. Perhaps the most striking proof of the relation- 
ship to the art of Khotan is afforded by the statue of the 
divine hero of Turkestan, Bisjamon, now in the Kiovogo- 
Kokuji Temple at Kioto, Japan, in all probability a Chinese 
work of the seventh or eighth century. Among the finest 
specimens of this phase of Chinese sculpture, in which the 


THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 541 


conventionalism of oriental art is relieved by a partial natu- 
ralism, are a small torso of a Bodhisattva (saint on the way 
to become a Buddha) in the Boston Museum, and at Long- 
men, pictorial reliefs representing processions, on the tomb 
of the Emperor Taitsong six high reliefs of his favorite horses, 
and at the entrance to the temples figures of keepers of the 
gates. A comparison of these Tang sculptures at Longmen 
with those of the archaic epoch at the same place will illus- 
trate the much increased influence of Hellenism. Although 
the Greek lessons in a more correct treatment of the human 
form and in a greater nobility of spiritual content continued 
to act as a leaven in all later Chinese art, the specific imita- 
tion gradually ceased in the eighth, ninth, and tenth cen- 
turies. The sculpture of this subsequent phase of Tang was 
less numerous and less distinguished, yielding in popular 
favor to painting; and yet it would be impossible to recog- 
nize a falling off if we could with any surety follow certain 
critics in assigning to this later date the five wonderful 
Chinese figures in wood, representing Bodhisattvas (?) 
mounted on symbolical animals, in the temple of Toji, Kioto, 
Japan, instead of, with other critics (as seems to the present 
writer more logical) to the Go school of the archaic period. 
There are analogies between the later manner of Tang and 
the Gupta art of India. The subsequent eras have little im- 
portance for sculpture. 


VII. Corea 


With the possible exception of a few small and somewhat 
rude bronzes, chiefly in Prince Yi’s Household Museum, 
Seoul, the estimate of Corean sculpture has still to be based 
almost wholly upon the hypothetical ascription to that coun- 
try of certain works now in Japan. It has been conjectured 
that there was a flourishing period of sculptural production in 
Corea at the end of the sixth or the beginning of the seventh 
century after Christ, deriving its inspiration apparently from 
the Chinese style of Go, modified by qualities that may be 
tentatively designated as Corean, such as a much increased 
delicacy, a pronounced attenuation of form, a roundness of 


542 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


general shape that suggests derivation from a column, and 
a noble sensitiveness to rhythmical beauty of line and com- 
position. The favorite medium was probably wood, and it 
may be by reason of its perishable nature that, except for 
one or two rock carvings, so little sculpture has been dis- 
covered in the country itself. The most beautiful statue that 
has been claimed by some critics as Corean is the standing 
figure, in wood, of the compassionate Bodhisattva Kwannon 
in the Yumedono of the Horyuji temple at Nara; but it is 
quite as likely that this masterpiece is the work of Japanese 
hands. A few statues of the second half of the seventh cen- 
tury in Japan have appeared to certain students of oriental 
art to be Corean, to afford evidence of a significant Corean 
Greco-Buddhist or at least Tang movement, and to prove a 
persisting vitality in Corean sculpture after the sixth cen- 
tury; but here the basis for attributions is much more dubious 
than in the earlier period. 


VIII. JAPAN 


The Swko period. Japanese sculpture throughout its his- 
tory has consisted in an indigenous adaptation and modifica- 
tion of the successive styles of China. It began with the intro- 
duction of Buddhism and with the civilization of the country 
in the second half of the sixth century after Christ. The 
earliest monuments come from the end of the sixth or the 
beginning of the seventh century; but no very marked na- 
tional characteristics were evolved until the Fujiwara period 
of the tenth to the twelfth centuries. The first period, of 
the seventh century, is known as the Suiko from the name 
of the great empress who inaugurated the epoch, but it is 
sometimes subdivided. Its style, though following a cen- 
tury later, is based upon that of the archaic era in China and 
upon Corean translations of Chinese prototypes. The bronze 
Trinity of a central seated Buddha and two lateral Bod- 
hisattvas on the altar of the Kondo of Horyuji, executed by 
the sculptor Tori, represents a more strictly Chinese phase 
of the Suiko style, possessing a meditative monumentality 
and a ponderous tranquillity. In other works, as in the 


THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 543 


wooden statues of the four heavenly kings or guardians of 
the points of the compass set at the corners of the square 
altars of the Kondo of Horyuji, the Corean influence seems 
to be uppermost; and in the more developed art of the middle 
of the century this influence resulted in a partial enlivenment 
of the draperies and of the expression in head and hands and 
in a more pictorial treatment of the surfaces. The imitation 
of Chinese models in which there is a slight Greceo-Buddhist 
influence possibly accounts for a perceptible increase of na- 
turalism and for a modelling in higher relief of details of 
costume. One of the masterpieces of this developed art is 
the seated Kwannon of the nunnery of Chuguji at Nara. 

The Hakuho period. The Suiko period is sometimes con- 
sidered to have ended with the first half of the seventh cen- 
tury, and the second half is separated and designated as the 
Hakuho period. In any case, it was marked by the intro- 
duction of another style from China, the early Tang, perhaps 
with Corean modifications. The Graeco-Buddhist influence 
is more probable than in the first half of the century. Al- 
though the religious monumentality and contained gravity 
still remain, the bodies have more correct proportions; the 
anatomy is further indicated; the activities and draperies 
suggest reality. The favorite medium is bronze. The most 
wonderful specimen is the Trinity in the Kondo of Yakushiji 
at Nara (Fig. 305). Certain productions of this period reveal 
a fondness for opulent and exquisite decorative detail; they 
aim at delicacies of modelling rather than large effects; they 
sacrifice the depth of Buddhist seriousness to charm and a 
desire for tenderness and sweetness; in a word, they indicate 
the first glimmer of a distinctive Japanese sculpture. The 
finest example is a small Buddhist Trinity enclosed in a 
wooden shrine in the Kondo of Horyuji. In many respects 
the Hakuho period in Japan, like the Tang in China, repre- 
sents the greatest sculptural achievement of which the coun- 
try was capable. 

Later periods. The succeeding epochs of Nara (700-800) 
and of Jogan (800-900) witnessed no essentially new sculp- 
tural developments except an increase in the repertoire of 
subjects. Instances of such thematic amplification are the 


FIG. 305—FIGURE AT LEFT IN BUDDHIST TRINITY. KONDO OF YAKUSHIJI 
MONASTERY, NARA. (FROM “JAPANESE TEMPLES AND THEIR TREASURES’ 
WITH THE COURTEOUS PERMISSION OF THE JAPANESE DEPARTMENT OF 
EDUCATION ) 


544 


THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 545 


forms of women and children, either conceived as divinities 
or as mere portraits, and especially the grotesques, whether 
consisting of new themes or of the old themes treated in a 
new way. This tendency to the grotesque may be studied 
at Nara in its most interesting phases in the twelve heavenly 
kings of clay in the Shin Yakushi monastery. The Fujiwara 
era, extending from the tenth through the twelfth centuries, 
fostered for the first time 
the marked development of 
the essentially Japanese 
characteristics (in distinc- 
tion from Chinese) of an 
almost mannered grace, ex- 
quisiteness, gentleness, and 
ornamental splendor. The 
favorite religious subjects 
were the kindlier divinities, 
Kwannon and Amida (the 
Buddha of boundless light). 
The Kamakura or Feudal 
epoch (1190-1337) was em- 
phatically the age of indi- 
vidualism, and in art indi- 
vidualism is likely to mean 
portraiture. Sculptured por- 
traits had not been un- 
known in the previous per- 
iods, but their great vogue 
belongs to the days of 
Kamakura. The inception 
of this realistic portraiture is traditionally connected by the 
Japanese with the names of two sculptors, Wunkei and 
Tankei. Wood as a medium now enjoyed almost a 
monopoly. The great collection of oriental art in the Boston 
Museum is again fortunate enough to include a mas- 
terpiece of this portraiture in the figure of the Patriarch of 
the Hosso sect (Fig. 306). The grotesques, such as the Lan- 
tern Bearer by Kobun, the third son of Wunkei, in the Kofu- 
kuji monastery, Nara, seek a similar individualization and are 


FIG. 306—PATRIARCH OF THE HOSSO 
SECT. MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS, BOSTON 


546 A HISTORY OF SCULPTURE 


marked by an almost baroque violence of movement. The 
sacred sculpture of the Ashikaga (1337-1582) and Tokugawa 
(1603-1868) periods traversed the same downward path to- 
wards stiff conventionalization and obtuseness to any real 
religious feeling as the output of the contemporary Ming and 
Manchu dynasties in China. The most memorable plastic 
products of these centuries in Japan were the dramatic masks. 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 


The classic work on Indian art, however obsolete in certain 
points, is still V. A. Smith’s A History of Fine Art wn India and 
Ceylon, Oxford, 1911. A. K. Coomaraswamy’s introduction to 
his Catalogue of the Indian Collection in the Museum of Fine 
Arts, Boston, 1923, constitutes a succinct history of Indian and 
related sculpture with more recent information, with an analysis 
of the religion of the country, so important to an understanding 
of the art, but sometimes without sufficient clearness in the defini- 
tion of the styles of the several epochs. Among other works by 
the same author, the student is referred especially to The Arts 
and Crafts of India and Ceylon, London, 1913, and, particularly 
for illustrations, Visvakarmad, Hxamples of Indian Sculpture, 
London, 1914. KE. B. Havell’s A Handbook of Indian Art, Lon- 
don, 1920, is a somewhat ecstatic discussion of Indian culture 
and religion rather than a manual of the art. More useful, so 
far as it goes, is W. Cohn’s Indische Plastik, Berlin, 1921. The 
new hypothesis of an earlier, archaic period of Indian seulpture 
may be studied in K. P. Jayaswal’s articles in the Journal of the 
Bihar and Orissa Research Society, V (1919), and in O. C. 
Gangoly’s article in the Modern Review, Calcutta, October, 1919. 

For Chinese and Japanese sculpture, EK. F. Fenollosa’s Hpochs 
of Chinese and Japanese Art, New York, 1911, though much less 
systematic and final than Smith’s history of Indian art, remains 
of fundamental significance. There is little of additional value 
on the sculpture in O. Miinsterberg’s German histories of Chinese 
(Esslingen, 1910) and of Japanese (Brunswick, 1904) art. 
E. Chavannes’s publication in the Ars Asiatica, Il (1914), Six 
monuments de la sculpture chinoise, is important for the slab 
at Fenway Court. K. With’s Buddhistische Plastik in Japan, 
Vienna, 1919, with many excellent illustrations, is perhaps the 
best general history of Japanese sculpture yet written; but, for 


THE SCULPTURE OF THE ORIENT 547 


the investigation of a single epoch, Langdon Warner has set a 
new standard of distinguished oriental scholarship in his Jap- 
anese Sculpture of the Suiko Period, New Haven, 1923. The 
defect of O. Kiimmel’s Die Kunst Ostasiens, Berlin, 1921, is its 
brevity. 


Za 


Wie 


GLOSSARY 


Ambo.—A pulpit for the singing of the Gospel or the Epistle. 

Archivolt—A moulded band carried around a curved opening 

Baldacchino—The Italian word for an architectural canopy. 

Bodhisattva—The Buddhistic term for a saint on the way to be- 
come a Buddha. 

Caryatid—A female figure used as a support. 

Chiaroscuro—The distribution of lights and shadows in a work 
OF ary 

Ciborium.—Used in this book in the sense of a receptacle for the 
Sacrament and not of a baldacchino above the altar. 

Cinquecento.—The Italian word for the sixteenth century. 

Contrapposto—The turning of the body upon its axis. Cf. p. 340. 

Détente—A French term for the relaxation of Gothic realism at 
the end of the fifteenth century. 

Epitaph—A mortuary relief on a wall. Cf. p. 223. 

Frieze—The architectural term for a longitudinal band of con- 
siderable length, often decorated with sculpture in relief. 

Frontality —The placing of a figure so that a plumb-line dropped 
from the centre of the forehead would divide it into two 
enuatsparis, Cf. p.22. 

Iconography—The traditional mode of representing a subject in 
religious art. 

Illusionism—A term much used by recent writers to define the 
attempt in sculpture or in painting to suggest depth, as 
well as height and width. Cf. p. 155. 

Metope—In a Doric frieze, the rectangular block between two 
triglyphs. 

Misericord —“A shelving projection on the under side of a hinged 
seat in a choir-stall, so arranged that, when turned up, it 
gave support to one standing in the stall” (Murray). 

Pediment —A low, triangular gable, with cornices above and be- 
low. 

Pieta—The Italian term for the dead Christ held by his Mother. 
Cien.2el. 

Predella—A narrow panel under an altarpiece. 

549 


590. GLOSSARY 


Putto—tThe Italian term for the nude child as an artistic motif. 
Quattrocento—The Italian word for the fifteenth century. 
Reredos: See Retable. 

Retable-—Used in this book in the sense more usually imparted 
in English by the word reredos, 7.e., sculptured or painted 
decoration above an altar; an altarpiece. 

Schrein—The German term for the centre of a retable. 

Stele-—The Greek name for a slab of stone set on end to form a 
monument. 

Strigil—‘A slightly curved vertical fluting”’ (Sturgis). 

Tondo—tThe Italian term for a panel of circular shape. 

Trecento.—The Italian word for the fourteenth century. 

Tympanum.—A space above a doorway or a window, bounded 
above by an arch or a curved moulding, 


INDEX OF SCULPTORS 


In cases where there are two or more entries after a name, the 
figures in Italics indicate the pages on which the principal discus- 
~ sions of the sculptors in question may be found; for masters who 
are mentioned only incidentally, the Italic type has not been used. 


Adams, Herbert, 508f. 
Agasias of Ephesus, 145f. 
Agelaidas of Argos, 72, 95. 
Agesander of Rhodes, 144. 
Agoracritus of Paros, 102. 
Aitken, Robert Ingersoll, 518. 
Alberti, Leon Battista, 307. 
Alcamenes of Athens, 92, 102. 
Algardi, Alessandro, 378f., 397. 
Amadeo, Giovanni Antonio, 
S23ff.. 326, 327, 329, 509. 
Anguier, Francois, 383, 385. 
Anguler, Michel, 383. 
Antelami: see Benedetto of 
Parma. 
Antenor of Athens, 83f. 
Antonianus of Aphrodisias, 162. 
Apollonius, son of Archias, of 
Athens, 147. 
Apollonius of Tralles, 144. 
Arca: see Bari, Niccolo da. 
Archermus of Chios, 64. 
Archipenko, Alexander, 
522. 
Arfe, Juan de, 366. 
Arnolfo of Florence (di Cam- 
bio?), 285f., 288. 
Athenodorus of Rhodes, 144. 


491, 


Bacon, John, the Elder, 404. 
Balduccio, Giovanni di, 290. 


551 


Ball, Thomas, 494f., 496, 499, 
506. 
Bandinelli, Baccio, 341f. 
Bandini, Giovanni, 342, 347. 
Bari, Niccolo da, 328. 
Barisanus of Trani, 214ff. 
Barnard, George Grey, 
512, 514f., 518. 
Barrias, Ernest, 490. 
Bartholomé, Albert, 453f., 455, 
482, 514. 
Bartlett, Paul Wayland, 517. 
Bartolini, Lorenzo, 475. 
Barye, Antoine Louis, 
438ff., 440, 442, 499. 
Beaugrant, Guyot de, 357. 
Beauneveu, André, 232f., 245. 
Becerra, Gaspar, 368f. 
Begarelli, Antonio, 329. 
Begas, Reinhold, 457f. 
Bellver, Ricardo, 488. 
Benedetto of Parma, 212f, 
Bernini, Giovanni Lorenzo, 
873ff.. 378, 380, 383, 385, 
394, 397, 407, 410, 458. 
Berruguete, Alonso, 367f., 411. 
Bird, Francis, 402. 
Bistolfi, Leonardo, 479, 488. 
Blay, Miguel, 488ff. 
Blondeel, Lancelot, 355, 357. 
Boccioni, Umberto, 523. 


509, 


436, 


552 INDEX OF SCULPTORS 


Boehm, Joseph Edgar, 481. 
Boethus of Chalcedon, 140. 
Bologna, Giovanni, 345ff., 354, 
362, 363, 381, 387. 
Bonannus of Pisa, 215f. 
Borglum, Gutzon, 498, 6177. 
Borglum, Solon Hannibal, 513, 
517. 
Borreman, Jan, 248. 
Bouchard, Henri, 455, 511. 
Bouchardon, Edme, 388f. 
Bourdelle, Emile Antoine, 454f. 
Bracci, Pietro, 379f. 
Braecke, Pierre, 471. 
Brancusi, Constantin, 521f. 
Bregno, Andrea, 314, 329ff. 
Brock, Thomas, 482f. 
Broeucq, Jacques du, 354f. 
Brown, Henry Kirke, 494, 495, 
497, 499. 
Briggemann, Hans, 260. 
Brunelleschi, Filippo, 306. 
Bryaxis of Athens, 124f. 
Buon, Bartolommeo, 325. 
Buon, Giovanni, 325. 
Buonarroti, see Michael Angelo. 


Caffier1, Jean Jacques, 391f. 

Calamis of Athens, 87, 102. 

Calcagni, Tiberio, 339. 

Camaino, Tino di, 288. 

Cambio, Arnolfo di: see Arnolfo 
of Florence. 

Campionesi, the, 291, 323, 326. 

Canachus of Sicyon, 72. 

Candido, Pietro, 363. 

Cano, Alonso, 414. 

Canova, Antonio, 418, 419ff., 
422, 423, 494. 

Carpeaux, Jean Baptiste, 440ff., 
449, 504, 516. 

Cartellier, Pierre, 423. 

Castro, Felipe de, 416. 


Cellini, Benvenuto, 342, 343ff., 
346. 

Chantrey, Francis, 427. 

Chapu, Henri, 447f., 462, 483, — 
502. 


Charlier, Guillaume, 471, 511. 
Chaudet, Antoine Denis, 423. 
Chinard, Joseph, 423f. 

Clara, José, 489. 

Cleomenes of Athens, 147. 
Clodion, 390, 393f. 

Coecke, Peeter, 356f. 

Colin, Alexander, 359. 
Colombe, Michel, 240ff., 349. 
Colotes of Heraclea, 102. 
Colyns de Nole, Jacob, 357. 
Coustou, Guillaume I, 385f. 
Coustou, Guillaume II, 385. 
Coustou, Nicolas, 385. 
Coysevox, Antoine, 383f., 385. 
Crawford, Thomas, 429f., 500. 
Cresilas of Cydon, 101f. 
Critius of Athens, 83f., 105, 108. 
Cruz, Diego de la, 281. 


Dallin, Cyrus Edwin, 513. 

Dalou, Jules, 443ff., 452, 458, 
481, 484. 

Damophon of Messene, 141f. 

Dannecker, Johann Heinrich, 
104, 424f. 

Dauher, Adolf, 360f. 

Dauher, Hans, 361. 

David d’Angers, 436ff., 455. 

Degler, Hans, 405f. 

Delcour, Jean, 397. 

Desiderio da Settignano, 31/ff., 
317, 318, 319, 333, 364. 

Donatello, 6, 10, 298ff., 306, 
307, 309; 31] 7-312 ota: 
316, 320, 322, 324, 339, 446, 
465. 

Donner, Georg Raphael, 408f. 


INDEX OF SCULPTORS 553 


Douwermann, Heinrich, 260. 

Drury, Alfred, 484. 

Dubois, Paul, 448, 481. 

Duccio, Agostino di, 314f. 

Dupre, Giovanni, 475f. 

Duquesnoy, Francois, 
395, 408. 


3P7f., 


Epstein, Jacob, 487. 
Eutychides of Sicyon, 129. 


Faleonet, Etienne Maurice, 
390, 391, 394. 
Falguiere, Alexandre, 445f,, 


490, 515, 516, 517, 518. 
Fancelli, Domenico, 364f., 367. 
Faydherbe, Luc, 397. 
Fernandez, Gregorio, 41/f., 

415, 

Ferrata, Ercole, 376. 

Fiammingo II: see Duquesnoy. 
Flaxman, John, 426. 
Flotner, Peter, 360. 
Floris de  Vriendt, 

306, 

Foley, John Henry, 480. 
Ford, Edward Onslow, 484f. 
Forment, Damian, 366f. 
Fraikin, Charles Auguste, 467. 
Frampton, George James, 486f. 
Franqueville, Pierre, 346, 381. 
Frémiet, Emmanuel, 442f., 448, 

455, 462, 513, 517. 

French, Daniel Chester, 506ff., 

511, 

Fry, Sherry Edmundson, 518. 


Cornelis, 


Geefs, Guillaume, 467. 
Geel, Jan Frans van, 398. 
Gemito, Vincenzo, 478f. 
Gerhaert, Nicolaus, 266. 
Gerhard, Hubert, 362f. 
Gérines, Jacques de, 246f. 


Ghiberti, Lorenzo, 289, 297, 
302, 304, 305ff. 319, 320, 
344, 500. 

Gibbons, Grinling, 402f. 

Gilbert, Alfred, 485ff. 

Giotto, 287f. 

Girardon, Francois, 384f., 406. 
408. 

Giusti: see Juste. 

Glycon of Athens, 147. 

Goujon, Jean, 349ff., 381. 

Grafly, Charles, 518, 519. 

Grasser, Erasmus, 265f. 

Greenough, Horatio, 429f. 

Guglielmo, Master, 210f. 

Guido da Como, 214. 


Hahn, Hermann, 464. 

Haller, Hermann, 464. 

Hans of Gmiund, 279. 

Hernandez: see Fernandez. 

Hildebrand, Adolf, 462ff., 465, 
519, 

Hoetger, Bernhard, 464. 

Hoffman, Malvina, 519f. 

Hool, Jan van, 398. 

Houdon, Jean Antoine, 390, 
B94f. 

Huerta, Jean de la, 237. 

Hyatt, Anna Vaughn, 519. 


Juni, Juan de, 368, 412. 
Juste family, 349. 


Keyzer, Hendrik de, 400f. 
Keyzer, Pieter de, 401. 
Keyzer, Willem de, 401. 
Klinger, Max, 465f., 499. 
Kobun, 545. 

Krafft, Adam 261ff., 357. 
Krumper, Hans, 363. 


Lagaé, Jules, 472. 
Lambeaux, Jef, 471f. 


554 INDEX OF SCULPTORS 


Landowski, Paul, 455, 482, 489. 

Laurana, Francesco, 33/ff., 
§23. 

Le Bouteillier, Jean, 232. 

Le Brun, Charles, 383, 384, 
387, 423. 

Lehmbruck, Wilhelm, 464f. 

Le Moiturier, Antoine, 237. 

Lemoyne, Jean Baptiste, 389, 
391. 

Leochares of Athens, 124, 125, 
132. 

Leoni, Leone, 365f. 

Leoni, Pompeo, 366. 

Lombardo, Antonio, 327. 

Lombardo, Pietro, 327. 

Lombardo, Tullio, 327. 

Lomme, Janin, 279f. 

Lycius, 102. 

Lysippus, 112, 120ff., 129, 131. 


MacMonnies, Frederick, 515ff. 


Maiano, Benedetto da, 318, 
319f., 413. 
Maillol, Aristide, 452f., 455, 


463, 464, 465, 491, 492, 523. 
Maison, Rudolf, 459f. 
Maitani, Lorenzo, 288f. 
Manship, Paul, 487, 492, 520f. 
Mantegazza, Cristoforo and 
Antonio. 328; 326; 327.7 620. 
Marville, Jean de, 234, 237. 
Masegne, Jacobello and Pier 
Paolo dalle, 291. 
Matthew, Master, 275. 
Mazzoni, Guido, 328. 
Meit, Konrad, 361f. 
Mena, Pedro de, 414. 
Menelaus, 149. 
Mercadante, Lorenzo, 278. 
Mercié, Antonin, 446f. 
Messerschmidt, Franz Xaver, 
409f. 


MeStrovié, Ivan, 487, 492f,., 
§21. 

Metzner, Franz, 467, 492, 521. 
Meunier, Constantin, 445, 455, 
468ff.. 472, 474, 483, 489. 
Michael Angelo Buonarroti, 6, 

301, 338dff, 340, 301, wo 
372, 440, 448, 449, 450, 481, 

514, 515, 517, 

Michel, Claude: see Clodion. 

Michelozzi, Michelozzo, 298, 
307. 

Mikkiades of Chios, 64. 

Millan, Pedro, 278. 

Milles, Carl, 490. 

Milmore, Martin, 495f., 498. 

Minne, George, 465, 473f., 
521. 

Mino da Fiesole, 312ff., 318, 
329, 331. 

Mone, Jean, 355f. 

Montanés, Juan 
41 2ff. 

Moral, Lesmes Fernandez del, 
366. 

Minsterman, Ludwig, 405. 

Myron of Eleuthere, 87ff., 102, 
105, 108. 


Martinez, 


Nesiotes of Athens, 83f., 105, 
108. 

Niccolo, Master, 211f. 

Nicola d’Apulia, 210, 216, 
281ff., 284, 285, 290, 297, 
320. 

Niehaus, Charles Henry, 509f. 

Nollekens, Joseph, 404. 


Onatas of Atgina, 72. 

Opera, Giovanni dell’: see 
Bandini. 

Orcagna, Andrea, 287f. 

Ordonez, Bartolomé, 367, 368. 


INDEX OF SCULPTORS 555 


Peonius of Mende, 92, 101. 

Pajou, Augustin, 351, 392f., 
395. 

Palmer, Erastus Dow, 496, 500. 

Pasiteles, 148f. 

Pasti, Matteo dei, 315. 

Permoser, Balthasar, 408f. 

Phidias, 81, 82, 96ff., 102, 105. 

Pigalle, Jean Baptiste, 389f., 
395. 

Pilon, Germain, 351f., 364, 381. 

Pisano, Andrea, 286ff., 305f. 

Pisano, Giovanni, 210, 281, 
283 ff., 287, 297. 

Pisano, Nicola: see 
d’Apulia. 

Polasek, Albin, 518f. 

Pollaiuolo, Antonio, 315f., 317, 
365. 

Polyclitus, 82, 95f., 147, 153. 

Polydorus of Rhodes, 144. 

Powers, Hiram, 429f. 

Pradier, James, 440. 

Pratt, Bela Lyon, 510. 

Praxias of Athens, 102. 

Praxuples li 2 6 17/3jf., . 131, 
147, 418. 

Prieur, Barthélemy, 381f. 

Primaticcio, Francesco, 348, 
S01, 352; 

Puget, Pierre, 386f. 

Pythagoras of Rhegium, 87. 


Nicola 


Quellin, Artus I, 395f., 401. 

Quercia, Jacopo della, 297, 
304, 320f. . 

Querol, Agustin, 488. 


Rauch, Daniel Christian, 455f,, 
457, 458. 

Ravy, Jean, 232. 

Regnault, Guillaume, 242. 

Renier de Huy, 207. 


Rhoecus of Samos, 7. 

Richier, Ligier, 353f. 

Riemenschneider, Tilman, 259, 
2634. 

Rimmer, William, 498f., 506. 

Rinehart, Wiliam Henry, 500. 

Rizzo, Antonio, 325f. 

Robbia, Andrea della, 309f., 
SNM PAGE 

Robbia, Giovanni della, 311. 

Robbia, Luca della, 287, 308f., 
512: 

Rodin, Auguste, 483, 434, 
448ff., 458, 455, 472, 479, 
483, 487, 489, 491, 492, 493, 
498, 499, 511, 518, 514, 516, 
518, 519. 

Rogers, Randolph, 499. 

Rossellino, Antonio, 318f. 

Rossellino, Bernardo, 307, 312, 
318, 319. 

Rosso, Medardo, 479. 

Roubillac, Louis Francois, 403. 

Rousseau, Victor, 472f., 490. 

Rude, Francois, 436f., 488, 440, 
442, 446, 472. 

Rush, William, 429. 

Rysbrack, John Michael, 403. 


Saint-Gaudens, Augustus, 496, 
501, 502ff., 508, 510. 
Salzillo, Francisco, 415. 
Sansovino, Andrea, 335, 342. 
Sansovino, Jacopo, 342f. 
Santi, Andriolo, 291. 
Santi family, 291. 
Sarrazin, Jacques, 382. 
Schadow, Johann Gottfried, 
L@bf., 427, 455, 
Scheemakers, Peter, 403. 
Schliiter, Andreas, 406ff. 
Schmitz, Bruno, 458f., 467. 
Scopas, 112, 118ff., 124, 125. 


556 INDEX OF SCULPTORS 


Siemering, Rudolf, 458. 
Siloé, Gil de, 280f. 

Sinding, Stephan, 490. 

Sluter, Claus, 234ff., 266, 298. 
Stappen, Charles van der, 472. 
Stephanus, 148. 

Stevens, Alfred, 480f. 

Stone, Nicholas, 401f. 

Story, William Wetmore, 499. 
Stoss, Veit, 261ff., 357. 
Strongylion of Athens, 102. 
Styppax of Cyprus, 102. 
Syrlin, Jorg, the Elder, 265. 


Tacca, Pietro, 347f., 391. 

Taft, Lorado, 500, 510ff. 

Tankei, 545. 

Tatti, Jacopo: see Sansovino, 
Jacopo. 

Tauriscus of Tralles, 144. 

Theodorus of Samos, 7. 

Thornycroft, William Hamo, 
482. 

Thorvaldsen, Bertel, 72, 418, 
421f., 423, 490, 494. 

Tilgner, Viktor, 461f. 


Timotheus of Athens, 124, 
125. 

Tomé, Narciso, 415. 

Tori, 542. 


Torrigiano, Pietro, 364, 365. 

Trau, Giovanni da, 314, 329. 

Tribolo, Niccolo, 345. 

Troubetzkoi, Prince Paul, 490, 
491f., 517. 

Tuaillon, Louis, 464. 


Ugolino, Andrea di: see Pisano, 
Andrea. 


Vallfogona, 
2786. 

Vela, Vincenzo, 476f., 478. 

Verhaegen, Theodor, 399. 

Verhulst, Rombout, 401. 

Verrocchio, Andrea del, 315, 
816ff., 339. 

Vigarni, Felipe, 366, 368. 

Vigeland, Gustav, 490f. 

Vigne, Paul de, 472. 

Vinci, Leonardo da, 347, 348. 

Vincotte, Thomas, 472. 

Vischer, Peter, the Elder, 357ff., 
364. 

Vischer, Peter, the Younger, 
359f. 

Vriendt, Cornelis Floris de: see 
Floris de Vriendt, Cornelis. 

Vries, Adriaen de, 363. 


Pere Johan de, 


Wagmiiller, Michael, 459, 484. 

Wagner, Johann Peter Alexan- 
der, 408. 

Ward, John Quincy Adams, 
L96ff., 499, 504, 506. 

Warner, Olin Levi, 501, 502f., 
504. 

Watts, George Frederick, 483. 

Werve, Claus de, 236f. 

Weyden, Roger van der, 246. 

Wilton, Joseph, 404. 

Witte, Peeter de: see Candido, 
Pietro. 

Wolvinius, 186. 

Wood, Derwent, 482, 489. 

Wunkei, 545. 


Zarcillo: see Salzillo. 
Zumbusch, Kaspar, 460f. 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


In this index monuments are listed primarily by the places 
where they are now to be found. An asterisk indicates that an 


illustration is given. 


Abu Simbel, colossi of Ram- 
ses II, 27.* 

Abydos, Egypt, relief of Seti I, 
29.* 


AXgina marbles, 72-75*, 418, 
422. 

Agias, statue, 121-123.* 

Aix-en-Provence, statue by 
Nicolas Coustou, 385.* 

Ajanta, India, Gupta carvings, 
534. 

Albany, N. Y., cemetery, angel 
by Palmer, 496. 

Alcala de Henares, church of 
La Magistral, tomb by 
Ordonez, 367. 

Aldworth, church, 
knights, 271.* 

Alexander sarcophagus, 133f.* 


tombs of 


Amaravati, India, carvings 
from, 538. 

Amboise, relief of 15th cen- 
tury, 238. 


Amiens, cathedral, 
choir-stalls, 239. 
portals, west, 226ff.* 
Porte Dorée, 230. 
Amsterdam, 
Royal Palace, sculpture by 
Quellin, 395f. 
Ryks Museum, 
effigies by Jacques 
Gérines, 247. 


de 


557 


Amsterdam, 
Ryks Museum (Continued) 
organ panels, 248. 
panels for House of Char- 
ity, 400f. 
Visitation, 248. 
Angkor, carvings, 588. 
Angouléme, St. Pierre, facade, 
202 a2. 
Annaberg, church, high altar, 
360. 
Antwerp, 
cathedral, Virgin, 244. 
Hotel de Ville, fireplace, 
356.* 

St. André, pulpit, 398f.* 
Anuradhapura, standing Bud- 
dha, 536. 
Aphrodite of Cnidus, 

147. 
Aphrodite of Melos, 131f.* 
Apollo Belvedere, 132f.,* 374, 
419, 421. 
Apollo of Melos, 61f.* 
Apollo Sauroctonus, 116. 
Apollo from temple of Zeus at 
Olympia, 91.* 
Apollo from Veu, 151f.* 
“Apollos,” archaic Greek, 61f.,* 
. 79. 
Apoxyomenus, 121f.* 
Ara Pacis Auguste, 
158. 


115f.,* 


153ff.,* 


558 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Ardenne, royal castle, sculp- 
ture by Vincotte, 472. 
Arles, St. Trophime, facade, 
2U0f a etee 
Artemis of Versailles, 132. 
Ashurbanipal, reliefs of, 46ff.* 
Ashurnasirpal, statue, 40f.;* 
reliefs of, 42ff.* 
Assisi, S. Maria degli Angeli, 
altarpiece by Andrea 
della Robbia, 310.* 
Astorga, cathedral, retable by 
Becerra, 368. 
Athena Parthenos, 97ff.* 
Athens, 
Acropolis Museum, 
archaic female 
vott * 
Calfbearer, 65,* 76. 
Heracles and the Old Man 
of the Sea, 68. 
Man mounting 
(hee 
Ly phone C1 ecu. 
Victory tying her sandal, 


figures, 


chariot, 


109.25 

Athena Nike temple and 
balustrade, 108,* 125, 
dol. 


Erechtheum, 107f., 351. 
National Museum, 
Apollo of Melos, 61f.* 
heads from the temple of 
Athena Alea at Tegea, 
118f.* 
Nicandra statue, 60f.,* 79. 
sculptures from Lycosura, 
142. 
sculptures from the tem- 
ple of Asclepius at Epi- 
daurus, 125. 
Varvakeion Athena, 97f.* 
Victory of Delos, 64f.* 


Athens (Continued) 
Parthenon, 102ff., 418, 422. 
“Theseum,” 108. 
Attalus I, dedications of, 134ff.* 
Augsburg, 
cathedral, doors, 206, 215. 
church of St. Ulrich and St. 
Afra, retable by Degler, 
405f.* 

fountains of Augustus, Her- 
cules, and Mercury, 
are 

Augustus of Prima Porta, 153.* 


Aulnay, St. Pierre, Roman- 
esque sculpture, 202. 
Autun, St. Lazare, portal, 
20079 225, 
Avignon, 
cathedral, tombs of the 
popes, 233. 
St. Didier, relief by Laurana, 
ao2t. 
Avila, 
Sto. Tomas, tomb by Fan- 
celli, 365. 


S. Vicente, portals, 275. 


Babylon, Gate of Ishtar,  re- 
liefs, 48f.* 
Baltimore, Md., 
Clytie by Rinehart, 500.* 
Colonel Howard by Frémiet, 
442f.* 
groups by Barye, 439. 
monument by Niehaus, 509. 
Bamberg, 
cathedral, Gothic sculpture, 
251, 253,* 254, 


Pfarrkirche, retable by 
Stoss, 263. 
Barcelona, 
Casa Consistorial, archangel, 
279. 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES _— 559 


Barcelona (Continued) 

Casa de la Diputacion, 
frieze of heads, 279. 
medallion. of St. George, 

279. 
cathedral, 
reliquary of St. Eulalia, 
iT. 3 
sculptures 
367. 
Bar-le-Duc, St. Pierre, sepul- 
chral figure by Ligier 
Richier, 353. 
Barletta, portrait statue (Theo- 
dosius?), 180. 
Basel, cathedral, portal, 205. 
Basse, temple of Apollo Epi- 
curius, 109f. 
Belfort, Place d’Armes, group 
by Mercié, 446. 
Benevento, cathedral, 
Pp a ed 
Bergamo, 8. Maria Maggiore, 
facade and tombs by Ama- 
deo, 323ff.* 
monument to Donizetti by 
Vela, 476. 
Berlin, 
Arsenal, masks of dying war- 
riors by Schliiter, 407. 
Brandenburg Gate, sculp* 
ture by Schadow, 425. 
cathedral, tombs by Schliiter, 


by Ordonez, 


doors, 


407f. 
Ethnographical Museum, 
Buddha of  Gandhara 
style, 533.* 


Kaiser Friedrich Museum, 
bust by Desiderio, 312. 
bust by Meit, 362. 
Cupid by Duquesnoy, 378.* 
sculpture by Giovanni 

Pisano, 284, 


Berlin, 
Kaiser Friedrich Museum 
(Continued ) 
stalls by A. Dauher, 360. 
statues by Schadow, 425. 
Long Bridge, Great Elector 
by Schluter, 406f.* 
Marien-Kirche, pulpit by 
Schliter, 407. 
National Gallery, 
Amazon by Tuaillon, 464. 
bust of Bocklin by Hilde- 


brand, 464. 

bust of Menzel by Begas, 
458. 

kneeling woman by Lehm- 
bruck, 465. 

recumbent maiden by 


Schadow, 425. 
statue by Hildebrand, 463.* 
New Museum, 
Ikhnaton and his queen, 


30.* 
reliefs from the Great 
Altar of Pergamum, 
136ff.* 

Old Museum, Meleager after 
Scopas, 119. 

Rheingold Wine House, 
sculpture by Metzner, 
467. 

Royal Palace, 

Princesses by Schadow, 
425.* 


fountain by Begas, 457f. 
monument to William I 
by Begas, 457.* 
Unter den Linden, Frederick 


the Great by Rauch, 
455f.* 
Bewcastle, cross, 183f.* 
Bilbao, monument by Blay, 
488f.* 


560 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Blutenburg, wood-carvings, 
266. 
Boghaz-Keui, rock-cut reliefs 
50. 
Bologna, 
fountain by Giovanni Bo- 
logna, 345. 
S. Domenico, shrine of the 
saint, 290. 


S. Maria della Vita, Pieta 
by Niccolo da Bari, 328. 
S. Petronio, sculpture by 
Jacopo della Quercia, 
e201 
Bordeaux, 
cathedral, 
north portal, 231. 
St. Anne, 242.* 
statues on the apse but- 
tresses, 231. 

St. Seurin, porch, 230. 
Borghese Warrior, 145f.* 
Borgo San Donnino, cathedral, 

sculpture by Benedetto 
of Parma, 212. 
Borobudur, Buddhist carvings, 
537. 
Boston, Mass., 
Art Club, lions by Rimmer, 
498. 
Back Bay Fens, monument 
to O’Reilly by French, 
506. i : 
Common, Soldiers’ Monu- 
ment by Milmore, 496. 
Commonwealth Avenue, 
Garrison by Warner, 502. 
Hamilton by Rimmer, 499. 
Fenway Court, 
bust by Cellini, 345. 
Chinese stele, 539f.* 
Romanesque sculpture, 
202. 


Boston, Mass. (Continued) 
Forest Hills Cemetery, mon- 
ument to Milmore by 
French, 508. 
Museum of Fine Arts, 

Avalokitesvara (Sinhalese), 
537. 

Boddhisattva (Tang), 541. 

bronze Siva, 535f.* 

Cupid by Greenough, 480. 

Egyptian reliefs, 23.* 

Han slabs, 538f. 

head of Zeus, 99f.* 

Javanese relief, 537. 

Menkure and his Queen, 
201 

Patriarch, Japanese, 545.* 

Saite portrait head, 31.* 

sculptures by Pratt, 510. 

sculptures by Rimmer, 
498f.* 

Snake Goddess, 54f.* 


three-sided relief, Greek, 
93f 
Public Garden, Washington 
~ by Ball, 494. 


Public Library, 
doors by French, 508. 
Science and Art by Pratt, 


510. 
State House, 
Anne  MHutchinson by 


Dallin, 513. 
Washington by Chantrey, 
427. 
Webster by Powers, 430. 
(opposite State House), 
Shaw monument by 
Saint-Gaudens, 506. 
Trinity Church, 
Dr. Donald by Pratt, 510. 
Bourg, church of Brou, tombs, 
362. 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES _ 561 


Bourges, 
cathedral, tympanum of 
Last Judgment, 230, 
276. 
house of Jacques Cceur, 
carvings, 239. 
Boy and Goose, 140.* 


Branchide, seated statues 
from, 63f.* 

Breda, Protestant Church, 
choir-stalls, 247. 

Bremen, 

Bismarck by Hildebrand, 
464. 


fountain by Maison, 460.* 
Kaiser Frederick by Tuail- 
lon, 464. 
Breslau, Kreuz-Kirche, tomb 
of Duke Henry IV, 256. 
Bristol, England, Mayor’s 
Chapel, knight, 270. 
Brooklyn, N. Y., 
Beecher monument by Ward, 


497. ) 
sculptures by MacMonnies, 
iy ye 
Brou: see Bourg. 
Bruges, te 
Hospital of St. John, tym- 
panum, 244. 
Palais de Justice, fireplace, 
357. 
Brunswick, 
bronze lion, 206. 
cathedral, tomb of Henry 
the Lion, 257. 
Brussels, 


Avenue Louise, Horse Tamer 
by Vincotte, 472. 

Avenue Palmerston, La folle 
chanson by Lambeaux, 
470f.* 

Musée du Cinquantenaire, 


Brussels, 

Musée du  Cinquantenaire 
(Continued) 
retable by Borreman, 
248f.* 
terracotta by Faydherbe, 
597. 


Musée Royale, 


sculpture by Meunier, 
470. 

Sisters of Illusion by Rous- 
seau, 473.* 


Pare du Cinquantenaire, 
monument by Van _ der 
Stappen, 472. 
Place du Petit Sablon, monu- 
ment by Fraikin, 467. 
Rue Royale, monument by 
Geefs, 467. 
Budapest, angels by Donner, 
409. 
Burgos, 
cathedral, 
Gothic sculpture, 275f.* 
reliefs by Vigarni, 366. 
St. Jerome by Becerra, 
368.* 
church of Miraflores, sculp- 
ture by Gil de Siloé, 


281. 
Museum, tomb by Gil de 
Siloé, 281. 


Cairo, Egypt, Museum, 
head of Harmheb, 27f.* 
Khafre seated, 21. 
Sesostris I, 25.* 
Sheikh-el-Beled, 18f.* 
Cairo, Ill., Hewer by Barnard, 
509, 514. 
Calais, group by Rodin, 449. 
Calear, retable by Douwer- 
mann, 260. 


062 


Calcutta, Museum, 
archaic Indian statues, 530. 
Gandhara relief, 533. 


sculptures from  Bharhut, 
532, 

sculptures from Mathura, 
533. 

Calf-bearer, 65*, 76. 

Cambridge, England, King’s 


College, choir-stalls, 364. 
Cambridge, Mass., 

Fogg Museum, 

Burgundian capitals, 200. 
Cambodian head, 5388. 
Meleager, 119.* 

Harvard College Yard, John 
Harvard by French, 
506. 

Harvard University, Rob- 
inson Hall, Water-car- 
rier by Gemito, 477f.* 

Mount Auburn Cemetery, 

Chickering monument by 
Ball, 495. 
Coppenhagen monument 
by Milmore, 496.* 
Story by Story, 499. 
Candia, Museum, ivory “Div- 
ers” from Cnossus, 54. 
Capua, Museum, arch of Fred- 


erick II, fragments, 
216% 

Champmol (Dijon), monastery, 
portal, 234. 
pedestal for well, 234ff,* 
298. 

Chantilly, chapel, monument 


of Henri de Condé by 
Sarrazin, 382. 


Chaource, Holy Sepulchre, 
248. 
Charité-sur-Loire, La, tym- 


pana, 202. 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Charleston, S. C., Pitt by Wil- 
ton, 404. 
Chartres, cathedral, 
west portal, 200, 212, 224ff.,* 


251 eb rarer 
lateral portals, 226, 253, 255, 
268. 


Chateaudun, saints, 239. 
Chatsworth, Letitia Bona- 
parte by Canova, 421. 
Chester, 
cathedral, stalls, 271. 
Eaton Hall, Hugh Lupus by 
Watts, 483. 
Chicago, 
Art Institute, sculpture by 
Taft sig 
Lincoln Park, 
Goethe by Hahn, 464. 
Lincoln by Saint-Gaudens, 
504f.* 
Signal of Peace by Dallin, 
512i 
Midway Plaisance, fountain 
by Taft; 512f* 
Christiania, sculpture by Vige- 
land, 490f.* 
Cincinnati, 
Garfield by Niehaus, 509. 
group by S. Borglum, 513. 
Lincoln by Barnard, 514. 
Cividale, saints in stucco, 
184. 
Clermont-Ferrand, Notre Dame 
du Port, portal, 202. 
Cleve, retable by Douwermann, 
260. 
Cluny, capitals, 199. 
Cologne, 
cathedral, choir-pillars, 257. 
St. Cecilia, tympanum, 205. 
St. Gereon, Virgin, 14th Cen- 
tury, 258. 


- 


4 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Colombo, Museum, seated 
Buddha, 536. 
Como, Lake, Villa Carlotta, 


frieze by Thorvaldsen, 
422. 

Concord, Mass., Sleepy Hollow, 
Melvin - monument’ by 
French, 507f.* 

Conques, Ste. Foy, tympanum, 
202. 

Constantine, arch of, reliefs, 
161f7° 1651 * 

Constantinople, Ottoman Mu- 
seum, Alexander - sar- 
cophagus, 133f.* 

Copenhagen, Valkyr by Sin- 


ding, 490. 
Courtrai, Notre Dame, St. 
Catherine, 245. 
Cracow, 


cathedral, Potocki by Thor- 
valdsen, 422. 
St. Mary’s, retable by Stoss, 


261f.* 

Cremona, cathedral, Prophets, 
Laws 

Cuellar, S. Esteban, tombs, 
Qetie 


Cuenca, tombs, 279. 
Cyprus, sculpture from, 50. 


Delft, Nieuwe Kerk, tomb of 
William the Silent by 
De Keyzer, 400. 
Delphi, Museum, 
Agias, 121ff.* 
Charioteer, 86f.* 
Siphnian Treasury, 69ff.* 


Detroit, Mich., Tolstoi by 
Troubetzkoi, 491f.* 
Dijon, 
Champmol, monastery: see 


Champmol. 


563 
Dijon (Continued) 
Ducal Palace, Sluter by 
Bouchard, 455. 
Museum, 
bust of Christ by Sluter, 
236. 


tombs, 236ff,* 266, 280. 
Dinan, Du Guesclin by Fré- 
miet, 442. 


Dinton, England, tympanum, 


208;" 
Discobolus by Myron, 87f. 
Dordrecht, Groote Kerk, choir- 
stalls, 357. 
Dresden, 
Albertinum, 
Bacchante after Scopas, 119. 
Drama by Klinger, 466. 
Court Church, pulpit by 
Permoser, 408. 
Palace of the Zwinger, deco- 
ration by Permoser, 408. 


Duisburg, statue by Lehm- 
bruck, 465. 
Durham, cathedral, Roman- 


esque reliefs, 209. 
Dying Gladiator, 135f.* 


Edinburgh, cathedral, Steven- 
son by Saint-Gaudens, 
506. 
Elephanta, medieval 
carvings, 534f. 
Elgin marbles, 102ff. 
Eltra, medizval Indian carv- 
ings, 534f. 
Ely, cathedral, 
choir-stalls, 270. 
stone seats, 270. 
Escorial, sepulchral figures by 
Pompeo Leoni, 366. 
Exeter, England, cathedral, 
facade, 270. 


Indian 


564 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Farnese Bull, 144f.* 
Farnese Heracles, 147. 
Ferrara, cathedral, portal, 211f. 
Ferté-Milon, La, 
Racine by David d’Angers, 
437. 
relief on castle, 238. 
Fiesole, cathedral, altar by 
Mino, 313. 
Florence, 
Academy, David by Michael 
Angelo, 335, 339,340,341. 
Badia, 
altar by Mino, 313.* 
tomb by Mino, 314. 
baptistery, 
doors by Andrea Pisano, 
286f:,* 305f. 
doors by Ghiberti, 305ff.* 
Magdalene by Donatello, 
300. 
Bargello, 
Bacchus by Jacopo Sanso- 
vino, 342f.* 
Bacchus by Michael An- 
gelo, 335, 340. 
bust by Benedetto da 
Maiano, 320. 
bust by Bernini, 376. 
bust by Cellini, 345. 
bust by Laurana, 332. 
bust by Antonio Rossel- 
lino, 319.* 
bust by Verrocchio, 318. 
David by Donatello, 301f., 
316, 339, 446. 
David by Verrocchio, 316, 
339, 
group by Pollaiuolo, 315f.* 
Madonna by Luca. della 
Robbia, 308f.* 
Madonna by Michael An- 
gelo, 335, 341. 


Florence, 


Bargello (Continued). 

Madonna by Verrocchio, 
318.* 

Mercury by Giovanni 
Bologna, 345. 

Oceanus by Giovanni 
Bologna, 345. 

Perseus by Cellini, 344f.* 

reliefs by Brunelleschi and 
Ghiberti, 306. 

St. George by Donatello, 
300. 

St. John by Antonio Ros- 
sellino, 319. 

Victory by Michael An- 
gelo, 345. 

Virtue by Giovanni Bo- 
logna, 345. 

Boboli Garden, fountains by 
Giovanni Bologna, 
345f.* 

Casa Buonarroti, Madonna 
by Michael Angelo, 335, 
341. 

campanile, 

reliefs, 287. 

statues by Donatello, 298f.* 

cathedral, 

doors by  Luea della 
Robbia, 309. 

Pieta by Michael Angelo, 
339. 

statues by Donatello, 298f. 

Chapel of the Vanchetoni, 
bust by Desiderio, 312. 

Gallery of Modern Art, Abel 
by Dupré, 475. 

Hospital of the Innocents, 
reliefs by Andrea della 
Robbia, 309. 

Loggia dei Lanzi, 

Perseus by Cellini, 344. 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES _— 565 


Florence, 
Loggia dei Lanzi (Continued) 
Rape of the Sabine woman 
by Giovanni Bologna, 
346f.* 
Opera del Duomo, 
reliefs by Bandinelli and 
Bandini, 342. 
singing-gallery by Dona- 
tello, 302. 
singing-gallery by Luca 
della Robbia, 309. 
Or San Michele, 
group by Verrocchio, 317. 


statues by Donatello, 
298. 

tabernacle by Orcagna, 
288. 

Palazzo Panciatichi, Ma- 
donna by  Desiderio, 
elite 


Palazzo Vecchio, 
Hercules and Cacus by 
Bandinelli, 341f. 

Putto by Verrocchio, 317. 
Pazzi Chapel, reliefs by Luca 
della Robbia, 309. 
Piazza della Signoria, Cos- 

imo I1* by Giovanni 
Bologna, 346. 
Pitti Gallery, Charity by 
Bartolini, 475. 
S. Croce, 
Annunciation by 
tello, 302, 304.* 
pulpit by Benedetto da 
Maiano, 319. 
tomb by Bartolini, 475. 
tomb by Bernardo Rossel- 
lmo;7307,* 312: 
tomb by Desiderio, 312. 
S. Lorenzo, 
pulpits by Donatello, 301f. 


Dona- 


Florence, 
S. Lorenzo (Continued) 


tabernacle by Desiderio, 
312. 

tombs by Michael Angelo, 
338f.,* 340. 


S. Miniato, tomb by Antonio 
Rossellino, 319. 
Uffizi Gallery, 
Machiavelli by Bartolini, 
475, 
reliefs from the Ara Pacis 
Auguste, 153ff.* 
Venus dei Medici, 147, 480. 
Villa della Petraia, foun- 
tain by Giovanni Bo- 
logna, 346. 
Frankfort on the Main, 
Bethmann’s Museum, Ari- 
adne by Dannecker, 424. 
Municipal Sculpture  Gal- 
lery, Athena after 
Myron, 89. 
Stadel Art Institute, Ma- 
donna by Riemenschnei- 
der, 264. 
Frascarolo Lomellina, tomb by 
Bistolfi, 478f.* 
Freiberg, cathedral, Goldene 
Pforte, 244, 252.* 


Geneva, monument to Refor- 
mation, 455. 
Genoa, 
Camposanto, tombs, 477. 
Loggia dei Banchi, Cavour 
by Vela, 476. 
University, reliefs by Gio- 
vanni Bologna, 346. 
Gerona, cathedral, tomb, 279. 
Gheel, St. Dympna, tomb of 
Jan III de Mérode, 
356. 


566 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Ghent, cathedral, tomb by 
Delcour, 397. 

Gizeh, Great Sphinx, 21, 
2. 


Gloucester, England, cathedral, 
choir-stalls, 271. 
Gnesen, doors, 206. 
Granada, 
cathedral, 
Immaculate Conception by 
Cano, 414. 
sculptures by 
366. 
tomb of Ferdinand and 
Isabella by  Fancelli, 
365. 
tomb of parents of Charles 
V by Ordonez, 367. 
the Cartuja, 
Magdalene by Cano, 414. 
Gudea, statues of, 36f.* 


Vigarni, 


Haarlem, Episcopal Museum, 
Epiphany, 248. 

Hagen, Westphalia, fountain 
by Minne, 473f.* 

Hal, Notre Dame, 


retable by Jean Mone, 
355. 

Virgin, 245. 

Halicarnassus, Mausoleum at, 
12S e123 

Hamburg, monument to 
Brahms by Klinger, 
466. 

Harrisburg, Pa., groups by 
Barnard, 514f.* 

Hereford, cathedral, font, 
209. 


Hildesheim, cathedral, 
doors, 186ff.* 
Easter column, 186ff. 
font, 205ff.* 


Hoogstraeten, St. Catherine, 
tomb of Count de La-- 
laing, 356. 

Huy, Notre Dame, portal, 244. 


Indianapolis, Soldiers’ Monu- 


ment, 459. 

Innsbruck, Franciscan church, 
tomb of Maximilian, 
359. 

Isola Bella, tomb by Amadeo, 
325, 

Kampen, Stadhuis, fireplace, 
357. 


Karnak, reliefs of Seti I, 28f.* 
Katwijk-Binnen, tomb by Ver- 
hulst, 401. 
Khotan, carvings influenced by 
Hellenistic art, 540. 
Kioto, 
Kiovogo-Kokuji temple, 
statue of Bisjamon, 540. 
Toji temple, figures on ani- 
mals, 541. 
Konarak, Indian sculpture, 536. 


Lahore, Museum, statue of 
Kuvera, 533. 

Laocoon group, 148f.,* 146, 
339, 440. 


Léau, St. Léonard, tabernacle 


by Floris dé Vriendt, 
356. 

Leeds, sculpture by Drury, 
484, 


Leghorn, monument of Fer- 
dinand I, 347. 
Leipzig, 
Battle 
467. 
Museum, sculpture by Klin- 
ger, 465f. 


Monument, 458f.,* 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES __ 567 


Leon, cathedral, 
choir-stalls, 279. 
portals, 276. 
tomb of Bishop Martin, 276. 
Lerma, S. Pedro, tomb of 
Cristobal de Rojas, 
365f.* 
Leyden, reliefs by Verhulst, 
400f.* 
Liége, 
Archeological Museum, bust 
by Delcour, 397. 
St. Barthélemy, font, 207. 
Lierre, screen, 247.* 
Lille, relief by Donatello, 302. 
Lincoln, England, cathedral, 
angel-choir, 269. 
Judgment Porch, 268. 
Lincoln, Neb., Lincoln by 
French, 508. 

Linz, monument to Stelzhamer 
by Metzner, 467. 
Liverpool, Mower by Thorny- 

croft, 483. 
London, 
British Museum, 

bust by Meit, 362. 

Caryatid from the Erech- 
theum, 107f.* 

frieze from the temple of 
Apollo Epicurius at 
Basse, 109f. 

Indian sculptures, 533. 

Parthenon sculptures, 
102ff.,* 418, 422. 

portrait of Pericles, 101.* 

reliefs from the palace of 
Ashurbanipal, 46ff.* 

reliefs from the palace of 
Sennacherib, 45f.* 

sculptures from the Mau- 
soleum at Halicarnassus, 
1DStt* 


London, 

British Museum (Continued) 

sculptures from the palace 
of Ashurnasirpal, 40ff.* 

seated statues from Bran- 
chide, 63.* 

Buckingham Palace, Victoria 
Monument, 482. 

Burlington House, 
by Wood, 482. 

Charterhouse Chapel, monu- 
ment to Sutton by 
Stone, 402. 

Dorchester House, caryatides 
by Stevens, 481.* 

Kensington Gardens, 

Peter Pan by Frampton, 
487. 

Physical Energy by Watts, 
483 .* 

Lansdowne House, Heracles, 
119. 

National Portrait Gallery, 
busts by Nollekens, 404. 
busts by Roubillac, 403. 
Scott by Chantrey, 427. 

New War Office, decoration 
by Drury, 484. 

Owen School, Islington, Alice 
Owen by Frampton, 
A86f.* 

St. James church, Piccadilly, 

decorative carvings by 
Gibbons, 402.* 
font by Gibbons, 403. 

St. James’s Park, James II 
by Gibbons, 403. 

St. Paul’s cathedral, 
pediment by Bird, 402. 
tomb of Nelson by Flax- 

man, 426f.* 
tomb of Wellington by 
Stevens, 481. 


Dancer 


568 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


London (Continued) 
St. Paul’s School, Dean Colet 
by Thornycroft, 483. 
Tate Gallery, 
bust by Drury, 484. 
statues by Ford, 484. 


Teucer by Thornycroft, 
A482f.* 
Temple Church, tombs of 


knights, 270. 
Westminster Abbey, 


angels of transept-ends, 
Bbsie 

bust of Gordon by Ford, 
484. 


chapel of Henry VII, 272.* 
Gladstone by Brock, 482. 
tomb of Aymer de Val- 


ence, 271. 

tomb of Countess. of 
Richmond, 364. 

tomb. of Edward III, 


a es 
tomb of Henry III, 270. 
tomb of Henry VII, 364. 
tomb of Lord Mansfield 
by Flaxman, 426. 
tomb of Pitt by Bacon, 


404. 
tomb of Queen Eleanor, 
270. 
tomb of Wolfe by Wilton, 
404.* 
tombs of Holles family by 
Stone, 402. 
tombs by Roubillac, 408. 
Longmen, 
archaic Chinese carvings, 
540f.. 
Tang carvings, 541. 
Louvain, 


Ste. Gertrude, 
247. 


choir-stalls, 


Louvain (Continued) 

St. Jacques, tabernacle, 247. 
Lowell, Mass., Butler Memo- 
rial by Pratt, 510. 

Lucca, 
carvings of lintels, 214. 
cathedral, 
Romanesque carvings, 214. 
tomb. of Ilaria by Jacopo 
della Quercia, 321. 


“Ludovisi Throne,’ 93ff.,* 
116. 
Lycosura, fragments from, 142. 
Lyons, 
cathedral, reliefs on facade, 
231, 28t 
Museum, Graces by Chinard, 
423. 
Maastricht, St. Servatius, por- 
tal, 244. 
Madras, Central Museum, 
carvings from Amara- 
vati, 533. 
Madrid, 


house of Iturbe family, por- 
traits by. Blay, 489. 

Museum of Modern Art, 
group by Querol, 488. 
“Eclosion” by Blay, 489. 

Panteon de Atocha, tomb by 
Querol, 488. 

Park of Buen Retiro, angel 
by Bellver, 488. 

Plaza de Oriente, Philip IV 
by Tacca, 347, 

Prado, ivory by F aydherbe, 
397, 

Magdeburg, cathedral, 

tomb of Archbishop Ernest 
by Vischer, 357. . 

tomb of Archbishop Fred- 
erick I, 206f.* 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES _ 569 


Malaga, 
cathedral, choir-stalls by 
Pedro de Mena, 414. 
Sto. Domingo, Virgin by 
Pedro de Mena, 414.* 


Malines, 
cathedral, tomb by Fayd- 
herbe, 397. 


Notre Dame de Hanswyck, 
sculpture by Faydherbe, 
397. 
Mamallapuram, medieval In- 
dian carvings, 535. 
Manchester, England, 
Lincoln by Barnard, 514. 
Victoria by Ford, 484. 
Marble Faun, 116f.* 
Marcus Aurelius, column of, 
164. 
Marcus Aurelius, relief, 163.* 
Marseilles, old cathedral, tab- 
ernacle by Laurana, 332. 
Mathura, India, Museum, 
archaic statues, 530. 
carvings of Gandhara pe- 
riod, 533. 
standing Buddha, 534. 
Mayence, tomb of Konrad von 
Weinsberg, 258.* 
Meiningen, English Garden, 


bust of Otto Ludwig by . 


Hildebrand, 464. 
Menkure and his Queen, 20f.* 
Merseburg, cathedral, tomb of 
Rudolf of Swabia, 207. 
Metz, Lafayette by Bartlett, 
517. 
Midwolde, tomb by Verhulst, 
401. 
Milan, 
S. Ambrogio, 
altar-canopy, 184. 
altar-casing, 186. 


Milan, 
St. Ambrogio (Continued) 
capitals, 210. 
S. Eustorgio, shrine of St. 
Peter Martyr, 277, 290, 
B20. 
statue of Sforza by Leon- 
ardo da Vinci, 347. 
Modena, 


cathedral, 

Nativity by Mazzoni, 
328.* 

reliefs of the Passion, 
2123 

sculptures by Guglielmo 


and Niccolo, 210f. 

S. Francesco, Deposition by 
Begarelli, 329. 

S. Giovanni della Buona 
Morte, Holy Sepulchre 
by Mazzoni, 328. 

S. Pietro, altarpiece by Be- 
garelli, 329. 

Moissac, St. Pierre, Roman- 


esque sculpture, 198f., 
203,°205, 225; 
Monasterboice, cross, 184. 
Monreale, Sicily, doors by 
Barisanus and _ Bonannus, 
215. 


Mons, sculpture by Du 
Broeucq, 354. 
Montrottier, chateau, 


by Vischer, 359. 


reliefs 


Moulins, tomb of Montmo- 
rency by F. Anguier, 
383. 

Munich, 


Alte Residenz, fountain, 363. 

Forum, Rumford by Zum- 
busch, 461. 

Frauen-Kirche, 
265. 


choir-stalls, 


570 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Munich (Continued) 
Glyptothek, 
relief, Peasant and Cow, 
140ff.* 
sculpture from the temple 
of Aphaia at gina, 
72ff,* 418. 
Marien-Platz, Virgin, 363. 
Maximilians-Platz, fountain 
by Hildebrand, 464. 
National Museum, Judith by 
Meit, 362. 
Old Rathaus, statuettes by 
Grasser, 265f. 
St. Peter’s, tomb by Grasser, 
265. 
Wittelsbacher-Platz, © Maxi- 
milian by Thorvaldsen, 
422. 
Miinster, portal, 244, 252. 
Murcia, Ermita. de Jesus, 
groups by Salzillo, 415. 
Mycenz, Lion Gate, 53f.* 


Nancy, 
Drouot by David d’Angers, 
437f.* 
Franciscan church, tomb by 
Richier, 354. 
Nantes, cathedral, 
tomb by Colombe, 241f.* 
tomb by Dubois, 448. 


Naples, 

cathedral, Romanesque re- 
liefs, 217. 

Monte Oliveto, 
Annunciation by  Bene- 


detto da Maiano, 319. 
Nativity by Antonio Ros- 
sellino, 319. 
National Museum, 
Doryphorus © after 
clitus, 95f.* 


Poly- 


Naples, 

National Museum (Continued) 

Farnese Heracles by Gly- 
con, 147. 

Harmodius and Aristogi- 
ton after Critius and 
Nesiotes, 84ff.* 

head of Doryphorus by 
Apollonius, 147. 

S. Angelo a Nilo, tomb by 
Donatello, 302f.* 

S. Maria Donna _ Regina, 
tomb by Tino di Ca- 
maino, 288.* 

Triumphal Arch, sculpture 
by Laurana, 331. 

Nara, 

Chuguji nunnery, Kwannon, 
543. 

Horyuji temple, 

Hakuho Trinity, 543. 

Kwannon, 542. 

statues of heavenly kings, 


543. 
Trinity by Tori, 542. 

Kofukuji monastery, Lan- 
tern Bearer by Kobun, 
545. 

Kondo of Yakushiji, Trin- 
ity, 543f.* 

Shin Yakushi monastery, 


heavenly kings, 545. 
Naram-Sin, stele of, 38f.* 
Naumburg, cathedral, statues 

of benefactors, 254f.* 

Newark, N. J., Lincoln by G. 
Borglum, 517. 

New Haven, Conn., Yale Uni- 
versity, Nathan Hale by 
Pratt, 510. 

New York, 

All Souls Church, Bellows 

by Saint-Gaudens, 506. 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES | 571 


New York (Continued) 


Blumenthal Collection, bust 
by Pajou, 393.* 
Central Park, Indian by 
Ward, 497. 
City Hall Park, 
Civic Virtue by MacMon- 
nies, 517. 
Nathan Hale by MacMon- 
nies, 517. 
Fifth Avenue, Sherman by 
Saint-Gaudens, 504. 
Historical Society, 
fragments by Wilton, 404. 
J. Q. Adams by Green- 
ough, 430. 
Madison Square, Farragut 
by Saint-Gaudens, 506. 
Metropolitan Museum, 
Bacchante by MaeMon- 
nies, 515. 
Baigneuse 
394, 
Bear Trainer by Bartlett, 
517. 
Blacksmith by Bouchard, 
455. 
bust by Riemenschneider, 
264. 
Byzantine 
Poli 
early Gothic statue, 226. 
English retable, 273.* 
Flavian portrait, 158f.* 
group by Clodion, 394.* 
group by S. Borglum, 513.* 
infant by Manship, 521. 
Mares of Diomedes by G. 
Borglum, 518. 
Memory by French, 506. 
Mercury by Pigalle, 389. 
Nativity by Antonio Ros- 
sellino, 319. 


by  Houdon, 


Crucifixion, 


New York, 


Metropolitan Museum (Con- 
tinued) . 
Old Market Woman, 139.* 
Perseus by Gilbert, 485. 
relief by Hans Dauher, 
361* 
reliefs by Flotner, 360. 
Ruskin by G. Borglum, 
517. 
St. Anne, 243. 
St. Catherine, 239. 
St. John Baptist, 231. 
sculpture from chateau of 
Biron, 2438. 
sculpture from Cyprus, 50. 
sculptures by Barnard, 
514. 
sculptures by Rodin, 451. 
Spanish predella, 279. 
statues by Story, 499. 
statuette by Dalou, 443. 
White Captive by Palmer, 
496. 
Public Library, 
Bryant by Adams, 509. 
Truth by MacMonnies, 
515. 
Riverside Drive, Jeanne 
d’Are by Hyatt, 519. 
St. Bartholomew’s, sculpture 
by Adams, 509. 
Sub-Treasury, Washington 
by Ward, 497f.* 
Trinity Church, doors by 
Niehaus, 510. 
Union Square, statues by 
Brown, 494f.* 
Western Union Building, re- 
liefs by Manship, 521. 


Ninove, confessionals, 399. 
Norwich, England, cathedral, 
stalls, 272. 


572 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Noto, Madonna by Laurana, 
Ce a8 
Novgorod, doors, 206. 
Nuremberg, 
Burgschmiet-Strasse, 
by Krafft, 263. 
Germanic Museum, 
reliefs by Krafft, 262f.* 
sculpture of the 14th cen- 
tury, 257f. 
St. James, Apostles, 258. 
St. Lawrence, 
Annunciation 
262. 
tabernacle by Krafft, 263. 
tympanum, 258. 
St. Sebaldus, 
reliefs by Stoss, 263. 
reliquary by Vischer, 358f. 
tympanum, 258. 


relief 


by Stoss, 


Olympia, Museum, 
Hermes by Praxiteles, 113ff.* 
sculptures from the temple 
of Zeus, 90ff.* 
Victory by Peonius, 100f.* 
Oregon, Ill., monument by 


Taft, 511. 
Orvieto, 
cathedral, carvings on fa- 
cade, 288f.* 
S. Domenico, tomb by Ar- 
nolfo, 286. 
Oviedo, cathedral, Roman- 


esque sculpture, 275. 
Oxford, 
Balhiol, Jowett Memorial by 
_ Ford, 484. 

St. Mary the Virgin, porch 
by Stone, 402. 

University College, ceno- 
taph of. Shelley by 
Ford, 484. 


Padua, 
Arena chapel, Virgin by Gio- 
vanni Pisano, 285. 
church of the Eremitani, 
tombs by Andriolo Santi, 
291. 
S. Antonio, sculptures by 
Donatello, 298ff.,* 316. 
Palermo, Museum, 
bust by Laurana, 332.* 
metopes from Selinus, 66f.* 
Pampeluna, cathedral, 
Gothic sculpture, 276. 
tomb of Charles the Noble, 
279. 
Paris, 
Are de l’Etoile, 
relief by Rude, 436f. 
Victories by Pradier, 440. 
Ecole des Beaux Arts, 
bust of Robert by Pajou, 


393. 
tomb of Regnault by 
Chapu, 447. 


Bibhothéque Nationale, Psal- 
ter of Charles the Bald, 
185i 

Bois de Boulogne, Alphand 
monument by  Dalou, 
444, 

Hotel Carnavalet, 


decoration by Goujon, 
301% 

Louis XIV by Coysevox, 
Boe. 


Place du Carrousel, statue 
by Bartholomé, 454. 
cathedral, 
portals, 227, 255. 
reliefs on choir-screen, 
2528 
reliefs in east end, 281.. 
tomb by Pigalle, 390.* 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES — 573 


Paris, 
cathedral (Continued) 
Virgin of 14th century, 
231f.* 
Hotel de Chambrun, reliefs 
by Clodion, 393. 
Place de la Concorde, 
equestrian groups by G. 
Coustou, 385f.* 
equestrian groups by Coy- 
sevox, 383. 
statues by Pradier, 440. 
Rue de Grenelle, fountain by 
Bouchardon, 389. 
Hotel de Ville, 
group by Mercié, 446. 
Lantern-carrier by  Fré- 
miet, 442. 
Institute, 
Pascal by Pajou, 392. 
Voltaire by Pigalle, 390, 
398, 395. 
Louvre, Museum, 
Amour and Amitié by 
Pigalle, 390. 
Aphrodite of Melos, 131f.* 
Artemis of Versailles, 132f. 
Bérulle by Sarrazin, 382. 
Birague by Pilon, 352.* 
Borghese Warrior, 145.* 
bust by Caffieri, 391f.* 
bust by Houdon, 394f.* 
bust by Lemoyne, 388f.* 
Captives by Michael An- 
gelo, 337f.,* 340. 
Cupid and Psyche by Can- 
ova, 419. 
Cupid by  Bouchardon, 
389. 
Diana by Houdon, 394. 
Eros by Chaudet, 423. * 
Fisher Boy by Carpeaux, 
440, 


Paris, 


Louvre, Museum (Continued) 
Fisher Boy by Rude, 486, 
440. 


“Germanicus” by  Cleo- 
menes, 147. 
groups of animals’ by 
Barye, 439.* 
Gudea, 36f.* 


Hera of Samos, 60f.* 

Jeanne d’Arc by Chapu, 
447,* 502. 

Louis XV by Bouchardon, 
388. 

menument for the heart of 
Henry II, 351. 

Nymph by Cellini, 344. 

Psyche by Pradier, 440. 

putt: by Pigalle, 389f.* 

relief of St. George by 
Colombe, 242. 

relief by Desiderio, 312. 

reliefs by Goujon, 351. 

reliefs from palace of Sar- 
gon-I1 45% 

sculptures by Carpeaux, 
440, 442. 

sculptures by Coysevox, 
383f.* 

sculptures by Dubois, 448.* 

sculptures by  Falconet, 
391.* 

sculptures by Pajou, 392f. 

sculptures by Prieur, 381. 

sculptures by Puget, 386f.* 

sculptures by the Coustou, 
386. 

Seated Scribe, 20.* 

Souvré by F. Anguier, 
38217 

statues of Charles V and 
queen, 232f:* 

stele of Naram-Sin, 38f.+ 


574 


Paris, 


Louvre, Museum (Continued) 
tomb of Poncher, 242. 
Victory of Samothrace, 

120i 
Vierge d’Olivet, 242. 
Vulture stele from Tello, 
37ff. 

Louvre, Palace, 

caryatides by Sarrazin, 
382. 
decorations by F. Anguier, 
383. 
decorations by Girardon, 
384, 
decorations by Prieur, 381f. 
Flora by Carpeaux, 441.* 
lion by Barye, 488. 
Quadriga by Cartellier, 
423. 
sculpture by Goujon, 351. 
stone groups by Barye, 
439. 

Luxembourg, 

Amor Caritas by Saint- 
Gaudens, 504. 

Beethoven by Bourdelle, 
455. 

David by Mercie, 446. 

Pan by Frémiet, 442. 

sculpture by Rodin, 449ff.* 
Luxembourg Gardens, 
Bacchanale by Hoffman, 
519. 

monument to Delacroix by 
Dalou, 444. 

Silenus by Dalou, 444.* 

Musée Rodin, sculptures by 

Rodin, 450f.* 

Place de la Nation, monu- 
ment by Dalou, 448. 
Natural History Museum, 

Buffon by Pajou, 3938, 395. 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 
Paris (Continued) 


Place de |’Observatoire, Ney 
by Rude, 436f.* 

Opéra, Dance by Carpeaux, 
441, 

Palais de Justice, Berryer by 
Chapu, 447. 

Palais-Royal, monument to 
Hugo by Rodin, 450. 

Panthéon, 

pediment by David 
d’Angers, 437. 

Thinker by Rodin, 451. 

tomb of Rousseau. by 
Bartholomé, 454. | 

Pare Monceau, memorial to 
Gounod. by Mercié, 
446. 

Pere Lachaise, 

monument by Bartholomé, 
452ff.* 

tomb of Oscar Wilde by 
Epstein, 487. 

Petit Palais, 

Hymn to Dawn by Lan- 
dowski, 455. 
sculpture by Dalou, 448ff. 

Porte St. Denis, decoration 
by M. Anguier, 383. 

Place de Rivoli, Jeanne 
d’Arc by Fremiet, 442, 
448, eat 

St. Jean-St. Francois, St. 
Francis by Pilon, 352. 

Sorbonne, church of, tomb of 
Richelieu by Girardon, 
385. 

Square of the Innocents, 
fountain by Goujon, 
350i Fags ae 

Théatre des. Champs-Ely- 
sées, reliefs by Bourdelle, 
455. | 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES _— 575 


Paris (Continued) 
Théatre Francais, 
busts by Caffieri, 392. 
Corneille by  Falguiére, 
446. 7 
Voltaire by Houdon, 395f.* 
Val-de-Grace, decoration by 
M. Anguier, 383. 
Parma, carvings by Benedetto 
Oterarma. 2121* 
Pavia, 
the Certosa, sculpture by the 
Mantegazza and Ama- 
deo, 322ff.* 
S. Lanfranco, shrine by Ama- 
deo, 325. 
S. Michele, facade, 210. 
Persepolis, reliefs from the 
palaces of Xerxes and 
Artaxerxes, 50. 
Perugia, 8S. Bernardino, sculp- 
tures by Laurana, 314f.* 
Petrograd, Peter the Great by 
Falconet, 391. 
Petworth House, St. Michael 
by Flaxman, 426. 
Philadelphia, 
Fairmount Park, 
fountain by Rush, 429. 
Jeanne d’Are by Frémiet, 
442. 
Washington monument by 
Siemering, 458. 
Independence Hall, Wash- 
ington by Rush, 428f.* 
University of Pennsylvania 
Museum, stele of Kri- 
nuia, 126.* 
Pisa, 
baptistery, pulpit by. Nicola 
d’Apulia, 282f.* 
cathedral, 
doors by Bonsnntis: 215. 


Pisa; 
cathedral (Continued) 
sculpture by Giovanni Pi- 
sano, 284f. 
Pistoia, 
carvings of lintels, 214. 
S. Andrea, pulpit by Gio- 
vanni Pisano, 283f.* 
S. Bartolommeo, pulpit by 
Guido da Como, 214. 
Plasencia, cathedral, retable by 
Fernandez, 411. 


Poitiers, Notre Dame la 
Grande, facade, 202. 

Pollonaruwa, colossal statue, 
537. 

Prato, 


exterior pulpit, 302. 
interior pulpit, 313. 


Pressburg, 
cathedral, St. Martin by 
Donner, 409. 
theatre, fountain by Tilg- 
ner, 462. 


Princeton, N. J., 
Battle Monument, 516f.* 
Museum, feminine _ saint, 
243.* 


Quedlinburg, Abbey of, tombs 
of abbesses, 207. 


Ratisbon, 
St. James, facade, 205. 
Walhalla, Victories by 
Rauch, 456. 
Ravello, cathedral, doors, 215. 
Ravenna, 
sarcophagi, 176ff.* 
throne of Maximian, 179f.* 
Reims, 
cathedral, Gothic Bodiputre: 
-297ff, * 253th 


576 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Reims (Continued) 
Jeanne d’Arc by Dubois, 
448, 
Richmond, Va., 
Lee by Mercie, 446. 
Washington by Houdon, 395. 
Rimini, 8. Francesco, decora- 
tion by Laurana, 315. 
Ripoll, facade, 204. 
Ripon, stalls, 272. 
Rochester, England, cathedral, 
portal, 209. 
Rome, 
Villa Albani, 
reliefs by Thorvaldsen, 
422.* 
statue by Stephanus, 148f.* 
Piazza Barberini, fountain by 
Bernini, 374.* 
Villa Borghese, 
Apollo and Daphne by 
Bernini, 373f. 
Pauline Bonaparte by Can- 
ova, 419f.*. - 
Capitoline Hill, Marcus 
Aurelius, 301. 
Capitoline Museum, 
Boy and Goose after Boe- 
thus, 139f.* 
Dying Gaul, 135f.* 
“Marble Faun,” 116f.* 
relief of Marcus Aurelius, 
163f.* 
Palazzo dei Conservator, 
Innocent X by ea 
378. 
Arch of Constantine, reliefs, 
1608.7 216i" 
Lateran Museum, 
Christian ‘sarcophagi, 
173ff.* 
- Good Shepherd, 178f.* 
Marsyas after Myron, 89. 


Rome (Continued) 


Column of Marcus Aurelius, 
164. 
Museo di Villa Papa Giulio, 
terracotta Apollo from 
Ve, 161f% 
National Gallery of Modern 
Art, 
Hercules by  Bourdelle, 
454. 
Hercules and Lichas by 
Canova, 420. 
Sappho by Dupré, 475. 
sculptures by Medardo 
Rosso, 479. 
National Museum, 
Antinotis as Silvanus, re- 
lief, 162.* 
Discobolus after Myron, 
88.* 
group by Menelaus, 149. 
“Hellenistic Ruler,’ 140f.* 
Ludovisi Ares, 119. 
“Tudovisi Throne,” 93ff.,* 
116. 
reliefs from the Ara Pacis 
Auguste, 153ff.* 
Piazza Navona, fountain by 
Bernini, 374. 
Papal Museum of Sculpture, 
tomb of Sixtus IV by Pol- 
laiuolo, 316, 365. 
Quirinal hill, ancient statues 
of Horse-tamers, 339. 
Quirinal palace, frieze by 
Thorvaldsen, 421f. 
S. Andrea delle. Fratte, 
angels by Bernini, 376. 
SS. Apostoli, 
tomb of Clement. XIV, 
421. 
tomb of Pietro Riario, 
. 829. 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES = 577 


Rome, 

SS. Apostoli (Continued) 

tomb of Raffaello della 
Rovere, 331. ; 

S. Cecilia in Trastevere, bal- 
dacchino by Arnolfo, 
285. 

S. Ignazio, decoration by 
Algardi, 378. 

S. Maria di Loreto, St. Sus- 
anna by Duquesnoy, 
alt. 

S. Maria sopra Minerva, 
tombs by Bandinelli, 
342. 

S. Maria del Popolo, 

tomb of Cristoforo della 
Rovere, 330f.* 

tombs by Andrea Sanso- 
vino, 334f.* 

S. Maria della Vittoria, St. 
Theresa by Bernini, 376. 

S. Paolo fuori le Mura, bal- 

3 dacchino by  Arnolfo, 
285.* 

St. Peter’s, 

Grotte Vaticane, Junius 
Bassus_ sarcophagus, 
174f.* 

Pieta. by Michael Angelo, 
335f.,* 339, 340. 

relief of St. Leo by Algardi, 
319.* 

St. Andrew by Duquesnoy, 
378. 

shrine for St. Peter’s chair, 

paeaeo rol. 407, 

~ .tomb of Alexander VII by 
Bernini, 375.* 

~~ tomb of Clement XIII by 
Canova, 421. 

tomb of Leo XI by Al- 
gardi, 378. 


Rouen, 


Rome, 
- St. Peter’s (Continued) 


tomb of Pius VII by Thor- 
valdsen, 422. 
tomb of Urban VIII by 
Bernini, 378. | 
S. Pietro in Vincoli, tomb of 
Julius II, 338, 340. 
S. Sabina, doors, 180. 
Arch of Titus, reliefs, 157ff.* 
Column of Trajan, reliefs, 
159f.,* 422. 
Fontana di Trevi, 380.* 
Vatican, 
Aphrodite after Praxiteles, 
115f*, 147: 
Apollo Belvedere, 132f.,* 
374, 419, 421. 
Apollo Citharoedus, 119. 
Apoxyomenus after Ly- 
sippus, 121f.* 
Augustus from Prima 
Porta, 153f.* 
Christian sarcophagi ‘ of 
porphyry, 174. 
Ganymede after Leochares, 
1253 Soper 
Laocoédn group,  148f.,* 
146, 339, 440. Ts 
Meleager after Scopas, 
119. 
Perseus by Canova, 419. 
Tyche of Antioch after 
Kutychides, 129, 131f.* 


Romhild, tomb by  Vischer, 


308. 


Rothenburg, St. James, retable 


by Riemenschneider, 264. 


cathedral, 
Porte des Libraires, 231, 
25; 
stalls, 239. 


578 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Rouen (Continued) 
statue of Corneille by David 
d’Angers, 437. 
Ruthwell, cross, 184. 


St. Alban’s, England, cathe- 
dral, retable by Gilbert, 
486. 

St. Benoit-sur-Loire, Roman- 
esque sculpture, 202. 

St. Denis, cathedral, 

tomb of Henry II, 35lf,, 
400. 

tomb of Louis XII, 348f. 

tombs of 13th century, 230,* 
237. 

tombs of 
230. 

west portal, 224. 

St. George, Staten Id., foun- 
tain by Fry, 518. 

St. Gilles, facade, 201, 212. 

St. Mihiel, St. Etienne, Holy 
Sepulchre by  Richier, 
aoal.* 

St. Omer, Notre Dame, tomb 
by Du Broeucgq, 355. 

Saintes, Ste. Marie aux Dames, 
Romanesque — sculpture, 
202. 

Salamanca, cathedral, tomb of 
Aparicio, 276. 

Salerno, ambos, 216. 


14th century, 


Salisbury, 
cathedral, 
tomb of Bishop Jocelyn, 
209. 
tomb of Bishop Roger, 
207. : 
chapter-house, spandrels, 268. 
Samothrace, Victory of, 


1291f.* 


Sanchi, carvings on gateways, 


531f.* 
S. Cugat del Vallés, capital, 
195f.* 
San Francisco __ exposition, 
fountain by Aitken, 
518. 
Santiago de Compostela, cathe- 
dral, 
Portico de la Gloria, 203, 
26727458 
Puerta de Platerias, 203f.,* 
ie 


Santiago del Estero, Argen- 
tine, St. Francis Solano 


by Blay, 489. 

Sto. Domingo de la Calzada, 
retable by  Forment, 
367. 


Sto. Domingo de Silos, reliefs 
in cloister, 203. 


Saragossa, 
church of the 7 Pilar, 
retable by Forment, 
366f. 
Seo 


retable, 279. 
tomb of Archbishop de- 
Taina 3277; 
Sarnath, India, 
Agokan column, 582. 
carvings of Gandhara period, 
533. 
seated Buddha, 534. 
Schleswig, cathedral, retable by 
Briiggemann, 260. 
Segovia, cathedral, entomb- 
ment by Juan de Juni, 
368. 
Selinus, metopes from, 66f.* 
Seoul, Prince: Yi’s Household 
Museum, Corean 
bronzes, 541. 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES — 579 


Seville, 
cathedral, 
Crucifix by 
413. 
Immaculate Conception by 
Montaneés, 412. 
lateral doors of facade, 
278. 
retable, 279. 
tomb by Fancelli, 365. 
tomb of Lastra by Bellver, 
488. 
Museum, 
statues by 
365. 
Virgin by Montaneés, 412.* 
Siena, 
baptistery, 
font and relief by Jacopo 
della Quercia, 320. 
puttt and relief by Dona- 
tello, 302. 
cathedral, 
altar by  Bregno and 
Michael Angelo, 331. 
pulpit by Nicola d’Apulia, 
283 .* 
cemetery of the Misericor- 
dia, Pieta by Dupre, 
475. 
Fonte Gaia, 320. 
Palazzo Pubblico, fragments 
of Fonte Gaia by Jacopo 
della Quercia, 320. 
Sigienza, late Gothic tombs, 
279ff.* 
Solesmes, Holy Sepulchre, 240. 
Souillac, portal, 198. 


Montanes, 


Torrigiano, 


Springfield, Mass., Deacon 
Chapin by Saint-Gau- 
dens, 504. 


Stettin, Frederick the Great 
by Schadow, 425. 


Strassburg, 
cathedral, sculpture of the 
13th and 14th century, 
205f.,* 268. 
Maison de Notre Dame, 
busts by Gerhaert, 266. 
Municipal Museum, head of 
Prophet by Gerhaert, 
266. 
St. Thomas, tomb of Comte 
de Saxe by Pigalle, 390. 
Wilhelmer-Kirche, tomb of 
Philipp von Werd, 259. 
Stuttgart, Museum, statues by 
Dannecker, 424f.* 


Tarpatri, carvings 
ways, 535. 
Tarragona, cathedral, 

capital, 195f.* 
main portal, 277. 
retable by Pere Johan de 
Vallfogona, 278f.* 
Tatung, archaic Chinese carv- 


on gate- 


ings, 539f. 
Titusville, Penn., Driller by 
Niehaus, 509. 
Toledo, cathedral, 
choir-stalls, lower range, 


279. 
choir-stalls, upper range, 368. 
Puerta de los Leones, 278. 
Puerta del Reloj, 277. 
retable, 279. 


screen, 277. 

St. Francis by Pedro de 
Mena, 414. 

tomb of Siliceo by Bellver, 
488. ; 

Trasparente by Narciso 
Tomé, 415. 

Tompkinsville, Conn., Abbey 


Monument by Fry, 518. 


580 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Tongres, Ste. Materne, retable, 


248. 
Tonnerre, 
2314 
Torcello, Byzantine 
182. 
Toulouse, 
Museum, 
Nude by Falguiere, 445.* 
Romanesque sculpture, 
198f.* 
St. Sernin, 
203. 
Tournai, 
cathedral, 
facade, 244. 
screen by Floris de Vriendt, 
DOL 
Museum, epitaph of De 
Quinghien, 246.* 
Trani, doors, 214. 
Tréves, Diocesan Museum, 
tomb by Gerhaert, 266. 
Troyes, church of the Magda- 
lene, St. Martha, 243. 
Turin, Cavour Memorial by 
Dupre, 476. 


Ulm, cathedral, choir-stalls by 
Syrlin, 265,* 361. 


Valladolid, 
Museum, 
Christ by Juan de Juni, 
368. 
fragments of Petable by 
Berruguete, 367f.* 
sculptures by Fernandez, 
ALT 
sepulchral statues by Pom- 
peo Leoni and assistants, 
366. 
Santa Cruz, Virgin by Fer 
nandez, 412. 


Holy Sepulchre, 


reliefs, 


south portal, 


Veitshochheim, sculpture by 
Wagner, 408. 
Venice, 

campanile, statues by Jacopo 
Sansovino, 342. 

Colleoni by Verrocchio, 316f.* 
Ducal Palace, statues’ by 
Antonio Rizzo, 326.* 
church of the Frari, tomb of 
Tron by Antonio Rizzo, 

326, 360. 

SS. Giovanni e Paolo, tomb 
of Mocenigo by Pietro 
Lombardo, 327.* 

S. Maria dei Miracoli, deco? 
ration by the Lombardi, — 
B2ts 

St. Marks, 

Apostles by the Maseue 
291. 

Byzantine reliefs, 182. 

doors by Jacopo Sanso- 


vino, 343. 

S. Salvatore, tomb of Venier 
by Jacopo Sansovino, 
343. 


Venus dei Medici, 147, 480. 
Venus de Milo, 131f.* 
Verona, 
cathedral, portal, 211f. 
S. Maria Antica, tombs of 
the Scaligers, 290f.* 
S. Zeno, 


doors, 206. 
portal, 210f.* 
Versailles, 


decorations by Pajou, 392. 

fountains by Girardon, 384f.* 

Louis XV by Bouchardon, 
388. 

Napoleon by Vela, 475f.* 

relief by the Coustou, 385. 

Tréhouart by Carpeaux, 442. 


INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACKHS 581 


Versailles (Continued) 


Vergniaud by Cartellier, 423. 


Vézelay, portal, 199, 205, 225. 
Vienna, . 


Albrechts-Platz,, Mozart by 
Tilgner, 461f.* 

Augustinian Church,. tomb 
of Maria Christina by 
Canova, 421. 

Beethoven-Platz, monument 

7 by Zumbusch, 461. 

Belvedere, 

Charles VI by Donner, 409. 
Prince Eugene by Per- 
moser, 408, 409. 

_ Benda Collection, putto by 
Desiderio, 312.. 

cathedral, tomb of Frederick 
III, 266. 

Figdor Collection, bust by 
Adolf Dauher, 360. 
Graben, Trinity Column, 

409. 

Hofburg-Theater, decoration 
by Tilgner, 462. 

Imperial Museum, 

reliefs from  Gyjolbaschi- 
Trysa, 110. 

Imperial Treasury, _ salt- 
cellar by Cellini, 348. 
Maria-Theresien-Platz, mon- 
ument by Zumbusch, 

461. 

Natural History Museum, 
decoration by Tilgner, 
462. 

New Market, fountain by 
Donner, 409.* 

Pubhe Hospital, bust by 
Messerschmidt, 410. 
Stidtisches Depot, figures 
from fountain by Don- 

ner, 409. 


Vijayanagar, carvings on tem- 


ples, 535. 


Villeneuve-l’Arehevéque; Holy 


Sepulchre, 243. 


Washington, 


Capitol, 

Armed Freedom by Craw- 
ford, 480. 

doors by Crawford, 481f.* 

doors by Rogers, 500. 

Jefferson by David d’An- 
gers, 437. 

pediment by Crawford, 
430ff. 

Columbus Memorial by 
Dh artece bt 

Congressional Library, 

doors by Warner, 501f.* 

medallions by Pratt, 510. 

Michael Angelo by Bart- 
lett, 517. 

Coreoran Art Gallery, 

Greek Slave by Powers, 
430.* 

Napoleon by Vela, 476. 

Garfield Memorial by 
Ward, 497. 

Lafayette Square, monument 
by Falguiére and Mercié, 
446, 

McMillan Fountain by 
Adams, 509. 

National Gallery, Pitt by 
Wood, 482. 

Rock Creek Cemetery, mon- 
ument of Mrs. Adams 
by Saint-Gaudens, 504 

Smithsonian Institution, 
Washington by Green- 
ough, 429f.* 


Weimar, Library, bust of Schil- 


ler by Dannecker, 425. 


582 INDEX OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES 


Wells, facade, 267f£.* 
Willebroeck, bust of De Nayer 
by Vincotte, 472. 
Winchester, England, Victoria 
by Gilbert, 486. 
Windsor, St. George’s Chapel, 
Gothic angels, 272. 
monument of Duke of 
Clarence by Gilbert, 

A85f.* 

Wittenberg, tomb by Vischer 
the Younger, 359. 
Woburn, Mass., Rumford by 

Zumbusch, 461. 
Worcester, Mass., Museum of 
Art, sculpture by Pratt, 
510. 
Wurzburg, 
cathedral, 
tomb by Riemenschneider, 
263. 


Wiirzburg, 
cathedral (Continued) 
tombs of Albert von Hoh- 
enlohe and Gerhard von 
Schwarzburg, 258.* 
Virgin of 14th century, 
258. 
Episcopal Palace, decoration 
by Wagner, 408. 
Historical Society, Adam and 
Eve by Riemenschnei- 
der, 264.* 


Xanten, retable by Douwer- 
mann, 260. 


York, Museum, statues from 
abbey of St. Mary, 267. 


Zeus by Phidias at Olympia, — 
97, 99f. 


gst 


vel ie 


Ease > 
reat Sig 
wu ee Fes 
oles Mase 
= . Eat Pes 
7 ee 


tea 


Ses ies Sse nea re ed hates Fy tee eit eho 


Se 


Gi 
z= 


“Tae taste 


\? 


ay ne 


Lar 


ie 


Sl GA 


a 
> 


